An inquiry into the remarkable instances of history and Parliament records used by the author of The unreasonableness of a new separation on account of the oaths, whether they are faithfully cited and applied.
Brady, Robert, 1627?-1700.

The Words of the Author, p. 23.

Secondly, That upon the Agreement be∣tween King Stephen and Henry II. M••d her self was set aside, and Stephen was to continue King for his Life, and Henry II. to succeed him. Now, if Oaths of Alle∣giance must not be interperted by the pub∣lick Good, here are insuperable Difficul∣ties as to the Obligations of these Oaths, for the Allegiance was transferred from the right Heir, to an Ʋsurper; as Stephen must be owned to have been by thse who deny that Allegiance can be transferred from the right Heir: And they must con∣tinue Allegiance to the Ʋsurper for his Life, which is repugnant to the nature of our Constitution, if it be founded in a Li∣ne and Legal Succession. And again, Maud, to whom they had sworn, is set aside, and the Reversion of the Crown it entailed on her Son, although she was li∣ving.

What may be replied to this.

The insuperable Difficulties have been overcome before in the Discourse about the Pope's Confirmation of King Se∣phen: Page  26 As to Maud's having been set aside, it shall be considered in the last Para∣graph of this Instance, and also some∣thing more said of this Publick Good, which brought on this Agreement, and what it was; but it must needs be so, because done by the Common-Council of the Nation.