Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	according_a	king_n	power_n	2,981	5	4.9052	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91487	Severall speeches delivered at a conference concerning the power of Parliament, to proeeed [sic] against their King for misgovernment. In which is stated: I. That government by blood is not by law of nature, or divine, but only by humane and positive laws of every particular common-wealth, and may upon just causes be altered. II. The particular forme of monarchies and kingdomes, and the different laws whereby they are to be obtained, holden and governed ... III. The great reverence and respect due to kings, ... IV. The lawfulnesse of proceeding against princes: ... V. The coronation of princes, ... VI. What is due to onely succession by birth, and what interest or right an heire apparent hath to the crown, ... VII. How the next in succession by propinquity of blood, have often times been put back by the common-wealth, ... VIII. Divers other examples out of the states of France and England, for proofe that the next in blood are sometimes put back from succession, ... IX. What are the principall points which a common-wealth ought to respect in admitting or excluding their king, wherein is handled largely also of the diversity of religions, and other such causes.	Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610, attributed name.	1648 (1648)	Wing P573; Thomason E521_1; ESTC R203152	104,974	80

given to Man for this end and purpose for that little available were this priviledge of speaking if Men should live alone and converse with none Arist. l. 1. pol. c. 1 2 3 4. Thirdly not onely Aristotle but Theophrastus also Plutarch and others do confirme the same Theoph. lib. de Plaut Plutarch Com. de fortuna lib. de pietatem in parent by the poor estate and condition wherein Man is borne more infirme than any other creature though by creation hee bee Lord and Governour of all the rest for whereas each other creature is borne in a certaine sort armed and defended in it selfe as the Bull with his hornes the Boar with his tuske the Bear and Wolfe with their teeth the Bird with her feathers against cold and with her wings to flie away the Hart and Hare with their swiftnesse and the like onely Man is borne feeble and naked not able to provide or defend himselfe in many yeares but onely by the helpe of others which is a token that he is borne to live in company and to he holpen by others and this not onely for his necessity and helpe at his beginning whiles he is in this imbecility but also for his more comodious living in the rest of his dayes afterwards seeing no Man of himselfe is sufficient for himselfe and he that liveth alone can have no benefit of others or do any to others wherefore wittily said Aristotle in the second chapter of his first Book of Politiques That he which flieth to live in society is Deus aut Bellua a God or a beast for that either he doth it because he hath no need of any which is proper to God or else for that he will do good to none and feeleth not that natural instinct which Man hath to live in conversation which is a signe rather of a Beast than of a Man Cicero doth adde another reason for this purpose to wit the use of certain principal vertues given unto Man but principally justice and friendship which should be utterly in vain and to no utility if Man should not live in company of others for seeing the office of justice is to distribute to every one his own where no number is there no distribution can be used as also neither any act of friendship which yet in the society of Man is so necessary and usuall saith this excellent Man Vt nec aqua nec igne nic ipso sole pluribus in locis utamur quàm amicitia Cicero lib. de amîcitiâ That we use neither water nor fire nor the Sun it selfe in more places or occasions than friendship And to this effect of using friendship love and charity the one towards the other do Christian Doctours also and especially Augustine in his Book of friendship reduce the institution of this natural instinct of living in company Aug. lib. de amicitia Which seemeth also to be confirmed by God himselfe in those words of Genesis Dixit quoque Dominus Deus non est bonum hominem esse solum faciamus ei adjutorium simile sibi Gen. 2. 18. God said It is not good that Man should be alone let us make unto him an helpe or assistant like unto himselfe of which words is deduced that as this first society of our first Parents was of God and for so great purpose as here is set down the one to be holpen by the other so all other societies in like manner which grow of this first stand upon the same ground of God's Ordination for the selfe same end of Mans utility And I have beene the longer in speaking of this naturall instinct to society for that it is the first fountaine of all the rest that ensueth in a common-wealth for of this come families villages townes castles cities and common-wealthes all which Aristotle doth prove to be of nature for that this first inclination to live to gether whereof all those other things do spring is of nature Out of this is the second poynt before mentioned deduced to wit that government also superiority and jurisdiction of magistrates is likewise of nature for that it followeth of the former and seeing that it is impossible for men to live together with help and commodity of the one to the other except there be some Magistrate or other to keep order among them without which order there is nothing els to be hoped for as Job sayeth but horrour and confusion Job 10. v. 12. as for example wheresoever a multitude is gathered tegether if there bee not some to represse the insolent to assist the impotent reward the vertnous chasten the outragious and minister some kind of justice and equality unto the inhabitants their living together would be farre more hurtfull then their living asunder for that one would consume and devour the other and so we see that upon living together followeth of necessity some kind of jurisdiction in Magistrats and for that the former is of nature the other also is of nature All which is confirmed also by the consent and use of all nations throughout the world which generall consent Cicero calleth ipsius vocem naturae the voice of nature herselfe Cicero li. 1. de natura Deorum for there were never yet nation found either of ancient time or now in our dayes by the discovery of the Indies or else where among whom men living together had not some kind of Magistrate or superiour to governe them which evidently declareth that this point of Magistrates is also of nature and from God that created nature which poynt our civill law doth prove in like manner in the very beginning of our digests where the second title of the first booke is de origine juris civilis omnium magistratuum Lib. 1. digest tit 2. of the beginning of the civill law and of all magistrates which beginning is referred to this first principle of naturall instinct and Gods institution And last of all that God did concurre also expresly with this instinct of nature our Divines doe prove by cleare testimony of holy scripture as when God saith to Solomon by me Kings doe reigne Prov. 8. and Paul to the Romans avoucheth that authority is not but of God and therefore he which resisteth authority resisteth God Rom. 13. Which is to bee understood of authority power or jurisdiction in it selfe according to the first institution as also when it is lawfully laid upon any person for otherwise when it is either wrongfully taken or unjustly used it may be resisted in divers cases for then it is not lawfull Authority These two points then are of Nature to wit the Common-wealth and Government of the same by Magistrates but what kinde of Government each Common-wealth will have whether Democratia which is popular Government by the People it selfe as Athens Thebes and many other Cities of Greece had in old time and as the Cantons of Switzers at this day have or else Aristocratia which is the government of some certain chosen number of

the best as the Romans many yeares were governed by Consuls and Senatours and at this day the States of this countrey of Holland do imitate the same or else Monarchia which is the Regiment of one and this again either of an Emperour King Duke Earle or the like these particular Formes of Government I say are not determined by God or Nature as the other two points before for then they should be all one in all Nations as the other are seeing God and Nature are one to all but these particular Formes are left unto every Nation and countrey to chuse that Forme of Government which they shall like best and thinke most fit for the Natures and conditions of their People which Aristotle proveth throughout all the second and fourth Books of his Politiques very largely laying down divers kindes of Governments in his dayes as namely in Greece that of the Milesians Lacedemonians Candians and others and shewing the causes of their differences which he attributeth to the diversity of Mens Natures customes educations and other such causes that made them make choice of such or such Forme of Government And this might be proved also by infinite other Examples both of times past and present and in all Nations and countries both Christian and otherwise which have not had onely different fashions of Governments the one from the other but even among themselves at one time one Forme of Government And another at other times for the Romans first had Kings and after rejecting them for their evil Government they chose Consuls which were two Governours for every Year whose Authority yet they limited by a multitude of senatours which were of their counsel and these Mens power was restrained also by adding Tribunes of the People and sometimes Dictatours and finally they came to be governed last of all by Emperours The like might be said of Carthage in Africa and many Cities and Common-wealthes of Grece which in divers seasons and upon divers causes have taken different Formes of Government to themselves The like we see in Europe at this day for in onely Italie what different Formes of Government have you Naples hath a King for their Soveraigne Roma the Pope and under him one Senatour in place of so many as were wont to be in that Common-wealth Venice and Genua have Senatours and Dukes but little Authority have their Dukes Florence Farara Mantua Parma Vrbin and Savoy have their Dukes onely without Senatours and their power is absolute Milan was once a Kingdom but now a Dukedom the like is of Burgundy Lorain Bavire Gasconie and Britaine the lesser all which once had their distinct Kings and now have Dukes for their supreme Governours The like may be said of all Germany that many Yeares together had one King over all which now is divided into so many Duke ●omes Earldomes and other like Titles of Supreme Princes But the contrary is of Castile Aragon Portugal Barcelona and other Kingdomes this day in Spain which were first Earldomes onely and after Dukedomes and then Kingdomes and now again are all under one Monarchy The like is of Bohemie and Polonia which were but Dukedomes in old time and now are Kingdomes The like may be said of France also after the expulsion of the Romans which was first a Monarchy under Pharamond their first King and so continued for many Yeares under Clodion Meronys Childrik and Clodovaus their first christened Kings but after they divided it into four Kingdomes to wit one of Paris another of Suessons the third of Orleans and the fourth of Metts and so it continued for divers yeares but yet afterwards they made it one Monarchy again England also was first a Monarchy under the Britaines and then a Province under the Romans and after that divided into seven Kingdomes at once under the Saxons and now a Monarchy again under the English and all this by Gods permission and approbation who in token thereof suffered his own peculiar People also of Israel to be under divers manners of Governments in divers times as first under Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob then under Captaines as Moses Joshua and the like then under Judges as Othoniel Aiod and Gideon then under high Priests as Heli and Samuel then under Kings as Saul David and the rest and then under Captaines and high Priests again as Zorobabel Judas Machabeus and his Brethren untill the Government was lastly taken from them and they brought under the power of the Romans and forreigne Kings appointed by them So as of all this there can be no doubt but that the Common-wealth hath power to chuse their own fashion of Government as also to change the same upon reasonable causes as we see in all times and Countries and God no doubt approveth what the Realme determineth in this point for otherwise nothing could be certain for that of these changes doth depend all that hath succeeded In like manner is it evident that as the Common-wealth hath this Authority to chuse and change her Government so hath she also to limit the same with what Lawes and conditions she pleaseth whereof ensueth the great diversity of Authority and power which each one of the former Governments hath as for example the Consuls of Rome were but for one year other Officers and Magistrates were for more or lesse time as their Common-wealth did a lot them The Dukes of Venice at this day are for their lives except in certain cases wherein they may be deposed and those of Genua onely for two yeares and their power is very small and much limited and their Heires have no claime or pretence at all after them to that Dignity as the children and next of kin of other Dukes of Italy have though in different sort also for that the Dukedomes of Ferara Vrbin and Parma are limited onely to Heires male and for defect thereof to return to the Pope or Sea of Rome Florence and Mantua for like defects are to returne to the Empire and do not passe to the Heires female or to the next of kin as Savoy and some others do And now if we respect God and Nature as well might all these Governments follow one Law as so different for that neither God nor Nature prescribeth any of these particular Formes but concurreth with any that the Common-wealth it selfe appointeth and so it is to be believed that God and Nature concurred as well with Italy when it had but one Prince as now when it hath so many and the like with Germany and also with Swizerland which once was one Common-wealth onely under the Dukes and Marquesses of Austria and now are divided into thirteen Cantons or Common-wealths under popular Magistrates of their own as hath been said so as when Men talke of a natural Prince or natural Successour as many times I have heard the word used if it be understood of one that is borne in the same Realme or Countrey and so of our own natural Bloud it hath some

sense though he may be both good or bad and none hath been worse or more cruel many times than home-borne Princes but if it be meant as though any Prince had his particular Government or interest to succeed by institution of Nattre it is ridiculous for that Nature giveth it not as hath been declared but the particular constitution of every Common-wealth within it selfe The second Speech FIrst of all is to be considered that of all other Formes of Government the Monarchy of King in it selfe appeareth to be the most excellent and perfect and so do hold not onely Aristotle in his fore-named Bookes of Politiques and namely in his third with this onely condition that he governe by Lawes but Seneca also and Plutarch in his Morals and namely in that special Treatise wherein he discusseth An sens sit Respub tracta●●da whether an old man ought to take upon him the Government of a Common-wealth or no where he saith that Reg●um inter omnes respub consummatissima prima est a Kingdom is the most perfect Common-wealth among all other and the very first that is to say the most perfect for that it hath most commodities and least inconveniences in it selfe of any other Government and it is the first of all other for that all People commonly made their choise at the beginning of this kinde of Government so as of all other it is most ancient for so we reade that among the Syrians Medes and Persians their first Governours were Kings and when the children of Israel did aske a King at the hands of Samuel 1 Reg. 8. which was a thousand yeares before the coming of Christ they alledged for one reason that all Nations round about them had Kings for their Governours and at the very same time the chiefest Cities and Common wealths of Greece as the Lacedemonians Athenians Corinthians and others whereof divers afterwards took other Governments unto themselves for the abuses in kingly Government committed at that time were governed by Kings as at large proveth Dyanisius Halicarnasseus Coruelius Tacitus Cicero and others Dyonis Hal. l. 5. Cornel. Tac. l. 3. Cic. l. 1. Offic. The Romans also began with Kings as before I have noted and the reason of this is for that as our Christian Doctours doe gather especially Hierome and Chrisostome Hierom. l. 2. Epist 12. Chrisost hom 23. this kinde of Government resembleth most of all the Government of God that is but one it representeth the excellency of one sun that lightneth all the Planets of one soul in the body that governeth all the powers and members thereof and finally they shew it also to be most conforme unto Nature by example of the Bees which do choose unto themselves a King and do live under a Monarchy as the most excellentest of all other Governments to which purpose also I have heard alleadged sometimes by divers those words of Peter Subjecti estote omni humanae creaturae propter Deum sint Regi quasi precellenti sive ducibus ab co missis c. 1 Pet. 2. Be you subject to every humane creature for God's cause whether it be to a King as the most excellent or to Dukes sent by God for the punishment of evil men and praise of the good cut of which words some do note two points first that as on the one side the Apostle doth plainly teach that the Magistrates Authority is from God by his first institution in that he saith We must be subject to them for God's cause so on the other side he calleth it a humane creature or a thing created by man for that by man's free choice this particular Forme of Government as al other also is appointed in every Common-wealth and that by mans election and consent the same is laid upon some particular man or woman according to the Lawes of every Countrey all which maketh it rightly to be called both a humane creature and from God The second point which divers do note out of these words is that Peter calleth a King most excellent which though it may be understood in respect of the Dukes Authority whereof immediately there followeth mention yet may it seem also to be taken and verified of kingly Authority in respect of all other Governments seeing that at this time when the Apostle wrote this Epistle the chief Governour of the world was not called King but Emperour and therefore seeing in such a time Peter affirmeth the state of kingly Government to be most excellent it may seem he meant it absolutely signifying thereby that this is the best kinde of Government among all others though to confesse the truth between the Title of King and Emperour there is little or no difference in substance but onely in name for that the Authority is equal every King is an Emperour in his own Kingdom And finally the excellency of this Government above all other is not onely proved by the perfection thereof in it selfe as for that it is most ancient simple and conforme unto Nature and most resembling the Government of God himselfe as hath been said but by the effects also and utility that it bringeth unto the Subjects with farre lesse inconveniences than any other Forme of Government whatsoever if we compare them together for in the Monarchy of one King there is more unity agreement and conformity and thereby also celerity commonly in dispatching of businesses and in defending the Common-wealth than where many Heads be lesse passions also in one man than in many as for example in Demecratia where the common people do bear the chief sway which is Bellua multorum capitum as Cicero wisely said that is a Beast of many heads Cicero l. 1. Offic. Democratis There is nothing but sedition trouble tumults outrages and injustices committed upon every little occasion especially where crafty and cunning men may be admitted to incense or asswage them with sugred words such as were the Oratours in Athens and other Cities of Greece that had this Government and the Tribunes of the People of Rome and other such popular and plausible men who could move the waves raise up the windes and inkindle the fire of the vulgar Peoples affections passions or furies at their pleasure by which we see that of all other Common wealths these of popular Government have soonest come to raine which might be shewed not onely by old examples of Greece Asia and Africa but also of many Cities of Italy as Florence Bolonia Siena Pisa Arezzo Spoleto Perugio Padua and others which upon the fall or diminution of the Roman Empire under which they were before took unto themselves popular Governments wherein they were so tossed with continual sedition mutinies and banding of Factions as they could never have end thereof untill after infinit murders massacres and inundation of bloud they came in the end to be under the Monarchy of some one Prince or other as at this day they remain so that of all other Governments this is the

of the other two formes of Government also and namely in England all three do enter more or lesse for in that there is one King or Queen it is a Monarchy in that it hath certain Councels which must be heard it participateth of Aristocratia and in that the Commonalty have their voyces and Burgesses in Parliament it taketh part also of Democratia or popular Government All which linitations of the Princes absolute Authority as you see do come from the Common-wealth as having authority above their Princes for their restraint to the good of the Realme From like Authority and for like considerations have come the limitations of other Kings and kingly power in all times and Countries from the beginning both touching themselves and their posterity and successours as briefly in this place I shall declare And first of all if we will consider the two most renowned and allowed States of all the World I mean of the Romans and Grecians we shall finde that both of them began with Kings but yet with farre different Lawes and restraints about their Authorities for in Rome the Kings that succeeded Romulus their first Founder had as great and absolute Authority as ours have now a dayes but yet their children or next in bloud succeeded them not of necessity but new Kings were chosen partly by the Senate and partly by the people as Titus Livius testifieth Livil 1 dec 1. So as of three most excellent Kings that ensued immediatly after Romulus to wit Numa Pompilius Tullius Hostilius and Tarquinius Priscus none of them were of the Bloud Royal nor of kin the one to the other no nor yet Romans borne but chosen rather from among strangers for their vertue and valour and that by election of the Senate and consent of the People In Grecce and namely among the Lacedemonians which was the most eminent Kingdom among others at that time the succession of children after their fathers was more certain but yet Aristotle noteth Arist l. 2. c. 8. Pol. Plutarch in Lycurg Their authority and power was so restrained by certain Officers of the people named Ephori which commonly were five in number as they were not onely checked and chastened by them if occasion served but also deprived and somtimes put to death for which cause the said Philosopher did justly mislike this eminent jurisdiction of the Ephori over their Kings but yet hereby we see what authority the Common-wealth had in this case and what their meaning was in making Lawes restraining their Kings power to wit thereby the more to binde them to do justice which Cicero in his Offices uttereth in these words Justitiae fruendae causa apud majores nostros in Asia in Europa bene morati Reges olim sunt constiti c. at cum jus aquabile ab 〈◊〉 viro homines non consequerentur inventae sunt leges Cic. l. 2. Offic. Good Kings were appointed in old time among our Ancestours in Asia and Europe to the end thereby to obtain justice but when men could not obtain equal justice at one mans hands they invented Lawes The same reason yeildeth the same Philosopher in another place not onely of the first institution of Kingdomes but also of the change thereof again into other Government when these were abused Omnes antiquae gentes regibus quondam paruerunt c. Cic. l. 3. de legibus That is All old Nations did live under Kingdomes at the beginning which kinde of Government first they gave unto the most just and wisest men which they could finde and also after for love of them they gave the same to their posterity or next in kin as now also it remaineth where kingly Government is in use but other Countries which liked not that forme of Government and have shaken it off have done it not that they will not be under any but for that they will not be ever under one onely Thus far Cicero and speaketh this principally in defence of his own Common-wealth I mean the Roman which had cast off that kinde of Government as before hath been said for the offence they had taken against certain Kings of theirs and first of all against Romulus himselfe their first Founder for reigning at his pleasure without law as Titus Livius testifieth for which cause the Senatours at length slew him and cut him in small pieces And afterwards they were greatly grieved at the entring of Scrvius Tullius their sixth King for that he gat the Crown by fraud and not by Election of the Senate and special approbation of the people as he should have done but most of all they were exasperated by the proceeding of their seventh King named Lucius Tarquinius sirnamed the proud who for that he neglected the Lawes of Government prescribed to him by the Common-wealth as namely in that he consulted not with the Senate in matters of great importance and for that he made War and Peace of his own head and for for that he appointed to himselfe a Guard as though he had mistrusted the People and for that he did use injustice to divers particular men and suffered his children to be insolent he was expelled with all his posterity and the Government of Rome changed from a Kingdom unto the Regiment of Consuls after two hundred yeares that the other had endured And thus much of those Kingdomes of Italy and Greece and if likewise we will look upon other Kingdomes of Europe we shall see the very same to wit that every Kingdom and Countrey hath his particular Lawes prescribed to their Kings by the Common wealth both for their Government Authority and Succession in the same for if we behold the Roman Empire it selfe as it is at this day annexed to the German Electours though it be first in Dignity among Christian Princes yet shall we see it so restrained by particular Lawes as the Emperour can do much lesse in his State than other Kings in theirs for he can neither make War nor exact any contribution of men or money thereunto but by the free leave and consent of all the States of the German Die● or Parliament and for his children or next in kin they have no action interest or pretence at all to succeed in their Fathers Dignity but onely by free Election if they shall be thought worthy nay one of the chiefest points that the Emperour must swear at his entrance as Sleydan writeth Sleydan l. 8. Anno 1532. is this That he shall never go about to make the Dignity of the Emperour peculiar or bereditary to his Family but leave it unto the seven Electours free in their power to chuse his Successour according to the Law made by the Pope ●regory the fifth and the Emperour Charles the fourth in this behalfe Blond Dicad 2. l. 3. Crant l. c. 25. The Kingdomes of Poloma and Bohemia do go much after the same fashion both for their restrant of power and succession to their Kings For first touching their

it was not his but theirs Why doe the Kings of England France and Spain ask money of their Subjects in Parliaments if they might take it as their own Why are those contributions ●ermed ●y the name of Subsidies helps benevolences lones c. if all be due and not voluntary of the Subjects part How have Parliaments oftentimes denyed to their Princes such helps of money as they demanded Why are their Judges appointed to determine matter of Suits Pleas between the Prince and his Subjects if all be his and the Subject have nothing of his own And last of all why doth the Canon Law so streightly inhibit all Princes upon pain of excommunication to impose new impositions taxes upon their people without great consideration necessity free consent of the givers if all be the Princes nothing of the Subject Nay why be all Princes generally at this day prohibited to alienate any thing of their own Crown without consent of their people if they only be Lords of all and the People have interest in nothing And hereby also we may gather what the Prophet Samuel meant when he thretned the Jews with the disorders of Kings that should reign over them not that these disorders were lawfull or appertained to a righteous King but that seeing they refused ●o be under the moderate government of their high Priests and other Governors which God had given them hitherto required to be ruled by Kings as other Heathen Nations of Egipt Babilon Syria Persia were whose manner of Government not only Historiogr●phers but Phylosophers also Aristotle among the rest doth note to have been very tyrannicall Arist l. 5. pol. c. 11. Joseph l. 6. ant c. 4. yet for that the Jews would needs haue that government as a matter of more pomp glory then that which hitherto they had had Samuel did first iusinuate to them what extortion wickednesse those Heathen Kings did use commonly over their people in taking their children servants wives goods the like from them that many Kings of Israel should do the like take it for their right and Soveraignty should oppose tyranize over them inforce them to cry out to God for help they should not find remedy for that so heddily they had demanded this change of Government which highly displeased Almighty God And this is the true meaning of that place if it be well considered and not to authorize hereby injustice or wickedness in any King seeing the principall point● recorded to all Princes and Kings through all course of Scripture are diligere inducrum justitiam apprebendere disciplinam ●facere veritatem that is to say to love judgement and justice to admit discipline and to execu●e truth and this is the instruction that God gave to the Jewes in Deutronomy Deut. 17. 3. Reg. 2. 10 for their Kings when they should have them which God foretold many yeares before they had any and this is the admonition that King David left unto Psal the 2. his Sonne and successour Salomon at his death and by him to all other Kiogs and Princes and for want of observing their points of judgement justice discipline and truth wee see not only Achab and Iezabel before mentioned grievously punished but many other Kings also by God himselfe as Achaz Manasses Ioachim and the like which had not been justice on Gods part so to punish them if it had been lawfull for them to use that manner of proceeding towards their people as these good instructors of Princes in out daies most fondly and wickedly do affirme and thus much for that place But to the point by what Law the Common-wealthes did punish their evill Princes it is by all law divine and human divine for that God dath approve that form of government which every common-wealth doth chuse unto it selfe as also the conditions statutes und limitations which it selfe shall appoint unto her Princes as largely before hath been declared And by all human law also for that all law both naturall nationall and positive doth teach us that Princes are subject to law and order and that the common-wealth which gave them their authority for the commmon good of all may also restraine or take the same way again if they abuse it to the common evill And whereas these men say that like as if a private man should make his inferiour or equall to be his prince he could not after restrain the same again and so neither the common wealth having once delivered away her authority I answer first that the comparison is not altogether like for that a privat man though he give his voice to make a Pr●nce yet he being but one maketh not the Prince wholly as the Common wealth doth and therefore no marvaile though it lie not in a perticular mans hand to unmake him again besides this a privat man having given his voice to make his Prince remaineth subject and inferiour to the same but the whole body though it be governed by the Prince as by the head yet is it not inferiour but superiour to the Prince neither so giveth the common wealth her authority and power up to any Prince that she depriveth her self utterly of the same when need shall require to use it for her defence for which she gave it And finally which is the chiefest reason of all and the very ground and foundation indeed of all Kings authority among christians the power and authority which the Prince hath from the common wealth is in very truth not absolute but potestas vicaria or deligata that is to say a power deligate or power by commission from the common wealth which is given with such restrictions cautels and conditions yea wi●h such plaine exceptions promises and oathes of both parties I meane between the King and common wealth at the day of his admission or coronation as if the same be not kept but willfully broken on either part then is the other not bound to observe his promise neither though never so solemnly made or sworn for that in all bargains agreements and con●racts where on part is bound mutually and reciprocally to the other by oath vow or condition there if one side go from his promise the other standeth not obliged to performe his and this is so notorious by all law both of nature and nations and so conform to all reason and equity that it is put among the very rules of both the civill and cannon law where it is said frustra a fidem sibi quis postulat servari ab eo cui sidem a se prestitam servare recusat He doth in vaine require promise to be kept unto him at an other mans hands to whom he refuseth to performe that which himselfe promised and againe Non abstringitur quis ●uramento ad implendam quod juravit si ab alia parte non impletur cujus respectu praebuit juramentum A man is not bound to performe that

his uncles own hands in the castle of Roan thereby to make the titl● of his succession more cleare which yet could not be for that as well Stow in his chtonicle as also Matthew of vvestminster and others before him do write that Geffry beside 〈◊〉 sonne left two daughters by the Lady Constance his wife Countesse and he●r of Brit●ain which by the law of England should have succeeded before Iohn but of this small accompt seemed to be made at that day Some yeares after when the Barons and states of England mi●liked utterly the government and proceeding of this King Iohn they rejected him againe and chose Lewis the Prince of France to be thei● King 3216 and did swear fea●ty to him in London as before hath bin said and they dep●i●●ed also the young prince Henry his sonne that was at that time but of 8 years old but upon the death of his father King Iohn that shorty ●fter insued they recalled againe that sentence and admitted this Henry to the Crown by the name of King Henry the third and disanulled the a leageance made unto Lewis Prince of France and so king Henry raigned for t●e 53 yeares afterward the ●ongest reign as I think that any before or after ●im hath had in England Moreover you ●now from this king Henry the third d● take th●ir first beginning the two branches at Yorke and L●ncastee wihch after fe●● to fo great contention about the crown Into which if we would enter we should see plainely as before hath beene noted that the best of all their titles after their deposition of king Richard the second depended of this authority of th● com●on-wealth fot that as the people were affected and the greater part prevailed ●o ●ere their titles either a lowed confirmed altered or disanulled by Parliament yet may not we well affirm but that either part when they were in possession and confirmed herein by these Parliaments were lawfu●l kings and that God concurred with them as with true princes for government of the people for if we should deny this point great incouveniences wou●d o●ow and we should shake the states of most princes in the world at this day And to conc●ude as one the one side pro●inquity of b●ood is a great ●reheminence towards the atteining of any Crowne so doth it not ever bind the common wea●th to yeeld there-unto if weightier reasons shauld urge them to the contrary neither is the Common-wealth bound bound alwayes to shut her eyes and to admit at ●p-hazard or of necessity every one that is next by succession of b●oud as some fa●se●y and fondly a●●meth but rather she is bound to consider well and maturely the person that i● to enter whether he be ●ike to perform his duty and charge committeed or no for th●t otherwise to admitt him that is an enimy or unfitis but to destroy the Common wealth and him t●gether This is my opinion aud this seemeth to me to be conform to al reason aw● religion p●ery wisdome po●●icy and to the use aud customs of all well governed common-wea●thes in the world neither do I meane to prejudice any any princes pretence or succession to any crown or dignity in the world but rather do hold that he ought to enjoy his preheminence but yet that he 〈◊〉 not pr●judicall thereby to the whole body which is ever 〈◊〉 be respected more then any one person whatsoever The ninth Speech ACcording to law both civill and Canon which is great reason it is a matter most certaine that he who is judge and hath to give sentence in the thing it selfe is also to judge of the cause for thereof is he called judge and if he have authority in the one good reason he should also have power to discerne the other so as if we grant according to the forme and proofes that the Realme or Common-wealth hath power to admit or put back the Prince or pretender to the Crowne then must we also confesse that the same Common wealth hath authority to judge of the lawfulnesse of the causes and considering further that it is in their owne affaire and in a matter that hath his whole beginning continuance and subsistance from them alone I meane from the Common wealth for that no man is King or Prince by institution of nature as before hath been declared but every King and Kings son hath his dignity and preheminence above other men by authority onely of the Common wealth God doth allow for a just and sufficient cause in this behalfe the onely will and judgement of the weal publick it selfe supposing alwayes as in reason we may that a whole Realme will never agree by orderly way of judgement for of this onely I meane and not of any particular faction of private men against the heyre apparent to exclude or put back the next heyr in blood and succession without a reasonable cause in their sight and censurre And seeing that they only are to be judges of this case we are to presume that what they determine is just and lawfull for the time and if at one time they should determine one thing and the contrary at another as they did often in England during the contention between York and Lancaster and in other like occasions what can a private man judge otherwise but that they had different reasons and motions to leade them at different times and they being properly lords and owners of the whole busines committed unto them it is enough for every particular man to subject himselfe to that which his Common wealth doth in this behalfe and to obey simply without any further inquisition except he should see that open injustice were done therin or God manifesty offended and the Realme indangered Open injustice I call when not the true Common wealth but some faction of wicked men should offer to determine this matter without lawfull authority of the Realme committed to them and I call manifest offence of God and danger of the Realme when such a man is preferred to the Crowne as is evident that he wil do what lyeth in him to the prejudice of them both I mean both of Gods glory and the publick wealth as for example if a Turk or Moor or some other notorious wicked man or tyrant should be offered by succession or otherwise to governe among Christians in which cases every man no doubt is bound to resist what hee can for that the very end and intent for which all government was first ordeined is herein manifestly impugned From this consideration of the weal publick are to be reduced all other considerations of most importance for discerning a good or evill Prince For that whosoever is most likely to defend preserve and benefit most his Realme and subjects he is most to be allowed and desired as most conforme to the end for which government was ordained And on the contrary side he that is least like to do this deserveth least to be preferred and here doth

SEVERALL SPEECHES Delivered At a Conference concerning the Power of Parliament to proceed against their KING for MISGOVERNMENT In which is Stated I. That Government by blood is not by Law of Nature or Divine but only by humane and positive Laws of every particular Common-wealth and may upon just causes be altered II. The particular forme of Monarchies and Kingdomes and the different Laws whereby they are to be obtained holden and governed in divers Countries according as each Common-wealth hath chosen and established III. The great reverence and respect due to Kings and yet how divers of them have been lawfully chastised by their Parliaments and Common-wealths for their misgovernment and of the good and prosperous successe that God commonly hath given to the same IV. The lawfulnesse of proceeding against Princes what interest Princes have in their Subjects goods or lives how Oathes do binde or may be broken by Subjects towards their Princes and finally the difference between a good King and a Tyrant V. The Coronation of Princes and manner of their admitting to their authority the Other which they doe make in the same unto the Common-wealth for their good Government VI. What is due to onely Succession by birth and what interest or right an Heire apparent hath to the Crown before he is Crowned or admitted by the Common-wealth and how justly he may be put back if he have not the parts requisite VII How the next in succession by propinquity of blood have often times been put back by the Common-wealth and others further off admitted in their places even in those Kingdoms where succession prevaileth with many examples of the Kingdomes of Israel Spaine VIII Divers other examples out of the States of France and England for proofe that the next in blood are sometimes put back from succession and how God hath approved the same with good successe IX What are the principall points which a Common-wealth ought to respect in admitting or excluding their King wherein is handled largely also of the diversity of Religions and other such causes LONDON Printed by Robert Ibbitson dwelling in Smith field neere the Queens-head-Tavern MDCXLVIII The first Speech THe Examples of a mad or furious Heir apparent or of one that were by Education a Turke or Moor in Religion or by Nature deprived of his Wit or Senses do plainly prove that propinquity of Birth or Bloud alone without other circumstances is not sufficient to be preferred to a Crown for that no Reason or Law Religion or Wisedom in the World can admit such Persons to the Government of the Common-wealth by whom no good but destruction may be expected to the same seeing that Government was ordeined for the benefit of the Weal-publique and not otherwise And though some in these our Dayes have affirmed the contrary and published the same in writing for the defence flattery or advancement of the Prince they favour affirming that even a fool mad or furious man or otherwise so wicked as he would endeavour to destroy the Common-wealth were to be admitted to the Seat Royal without further consideration if he be next in Bloud yet this is manifestly agaist all reason and conscience and against the very first end and purpose of institution of Common-wealths and Magistrates Hereof it doth ensue that some other Conditions also must needs be requisite for coming to Government by Succession besides the onely propinquity or priority in Bloud and that the Conditions must be assigned and limited out by some higher Authority than is that of the Prince himselfe who is bound and limited thereby and yet it seemeth evident they are not prescribed by any Law of Nature or Divine for that then they should be both immutable and the selfe-same in all Countries as God and Nature are one and the same to all without change where notwithstanding we see that these Conditions and Circumstances of succeeding by Birth are divers or different in different Countries as also they are subject to changes according to the diversity of Kingdomes Realmes and People whereby we are forced to conclude that every particular Countrey and Common-wealth hath prescribed these Conditions to it selfe and hath Authority to do the same For better proof whereof it is first of all to be supposed that albeit sociability or inclination to live together in company Man with Man whereof ensueth both City and Common-wealth as Aristotle gathereth in his first Book of Politiques be of Nature and consequently also of God that is Authour of Nature though Government in like manner and jurisdiction of Magistrates which do follow necessarily upon this living together in company be also of Nature yet the particular Forme or manner of this or that Government in this or that Fashion as to have many Governours few or one and those either Kings Dukes Earles or the like or that they should have this or that Authority more or lesse for longer or shorter time or be taken by Succession or Election themselves and their Children or next in Bloud all these things I say are not by Law either Natural or Divine for then as hath been said they should be all one in all Countries and Nations seeing God and Nature is one to all but they are ordained by particular positive Lawes of every Countrey But now that sociability in Mankinde or inclination to live in company is by Nature and consequently ordained by God for the common benefit of all is an easie thing to prove seeing that all ground of Realmes and Common-wealths dependeth of this point as of their first Principle for that a Common-wealth is nothing else but the good Government of a Multitude gathered together to live in one and therefore all old Philosophers Law-makers and Wise men that have treated of Government or Common-wealths as Plat● in his ten most excellent Bookes which he wrote of this matter intituling them of the Common-wealth Plato de repub Cicero de repub Arist. Polit. And Marcus Cicero that famous Councellour in other six Books that he writ of the same matter under the same Title And Aristotle that perhaps excelleth them both in eight Bookes which is called his Politiques All these I say do make their entrance to treat of their Common-wealth affaires from this first Principle to wit That man by Nature is sociable and inclined to live in company whereof do proceed first all private Houses then Villages then Townes then Cities then Kingdomes and Common-wealths This ground and Principle then do they prove by divers evident reasons as first for that in all Nations never so wilde and barbarous we see by experience that by one way or other they endeavour to live together either in Cities Townes Villages Caves Woods Tents or other like manner according to the Custome of each countrey Pompon Mela. lib. 3. cap. 3 4. Tacit. lib. 8. which universal instinct could never be in all but by impression of Nature it selfe Secondly they prove the same by that the use of speech is

Government and so placed as hath been said is under no law or restraint at all of his authority but that himselfe only is the quick and living law and that no limitation can be given unto him by any power under heaven except it be by his own will and that no Nation or Common-wealth can appoint or prescribe how they will obey or how their Prince shall govern them but must leave his authority free from all bands of law and this either Willingly or by violence is to be procured By which words it seemeth that he painteth out a perfect patterne of a tyrannicall Government which how it did further the King of Navar I do not know His other proposition is Apolog. pro Rege Cap. 20. That albeit the heire apparant which is next by birth to any Crown should be never so impotent or unfit to Govern as if for examples sake he should be deprived of his sences mad furious lunatique a fool or the like or that he should be known on the other side to be most malicious wicked vitious or abominable or should degenerate into a very beast yea if it were known that he should goe about to destroy the Common Wealth and drowne the ship which he had to guide yet saith this man he must be sacred and holy unto us and admitted without contradiction to his inheritance which God and nature hath laid upon him and his direction rèstraint or punishment must only be remited to God alone for that no man or Common-wealth may reforme or restrain him Which I doubt not will seeme unto you rather belly and base doctrine then to come from the head of any learned or discreet man that regardeth the end why Common-wealths and Kingdoms and all Governments were ordained by God and nature and not the flattering or adoring of any one miserable man that shall stand over them to destroy the whole But now to the particuler matter that we are to treat which is what is to be attributed to this succession or propinquity of birth alone I am of opinion that albeit their want not reasons on both sides among learned men what kind of providing Governours to Common-wealths is best either by simple and free election only or by succession of birth my opinion I say is that succession is much to be preferred not for that it wanteth all difficulties and inconveniences which all temporall things uppon earth have but like as before I have shewed of the particuler Government of a Monarchy in respect of other forms of regiment to wit that is wanted not all but had fewer inconveniences then their formes of Regiment have so say I also of this that albeit some inconveniences want not in succession yet are they commonly far lesse and fewer then would follow by meere election which are subiect to great and continuall dangers of ambition emulation division sedition and contention which do bring with them evident peril of universall destruction and disolation of the whole body and this at every change of the prince which change on the other side is much assured by succ●ssion for that great occasions of strife and contention are there by cut of 2. And besides this the Prince who is in present possession knowing that his son or next of kin is to be his heire hath more care to leave the realme in good order as we see that the husbandman hath to till and manure that ground which is his owne and to remaine to his posterity 3. A third commodity also there is for that lesse mutations and alterations are seen in the Common-wealth where succession prevaileth for that the sonne following his father doth commonly retaine the same friends councellors officers and servants which his father had before him pursueth the same actions and intentions with the same manner of proceeding for the most part whereas he that entereth by election being an aliene to him that went before him and never lightly his friend doth change alter and turne upsidowne all things 4. Furthermore which may be also a fourth reason he that entereth by succession for that he is either borne a Prince or hath been much respected still for his title to the Crowne bringeth with him lesse passions of hatred emulation anger envie or revenge against particuler men for that no man durst offend him then doth he which entereth by only election for that he having bin a subject equall to others before his advancement and thereby holding contention with many espetially at this election must needs have matter of quarrell with many which he will seeke easily to revenge when he is in authority as one the other side also such as were his equals before will beare him lesse respect and more unwillingly be under him then by birth he had been there Soveraigne 5. These and diverse other are the comodities of succession whereunto we may also add the preheminence and priveledge of primogenitura and auncetrie of birth so much respected and commended by holy writ not only in men but in all other creatures also whose first borne were dedicated to God himselfe and one notable example among other occurreth to my mind of the two sonnes of Isack of the which two albeit God hath ordained to chuse the younger before he was borne as S. Paul testifieth and to reject the elder that is to say that Iacob should inherite the benediction not Esau Yet would God have his yonger to procure the said priviledge of eldership from Esau by divers means as first by bargain and after by guile according to the storie we read in Genes 15 and 49. Deut. 21. and 15. 2 Paralip 21 and 3 Exod 3. and 2. Rom. 9. and 13 Genes 28 and 27. Out of which story two points may be pondered much to our purpose first that primogenitura or eldership of birth as I have said was greatly respected by God and according to that all the disce●t● and successions of Kings were commonly among that people for that ordinarily the elder 〈◊〉 ever succeded his Father in the Crowne of Iury. And the secon● p●int 〈…〉 God would shew even in this begining that yet this priviledge was not so 〈◊〉 but that upon just causes it might be broken as it was by this his choyce of Iacob the yonger and rejecting Esau the Elder and many times after in matter of government the same was practised by God himselfe as when Iudah the fourth tribe and not Ruben the 1 and Eldest was apointed by God enioy the scepter and Crown of the Iewes as also when King David died not in his first second or third sonne but his tenth in order to wit Solomon who was also the fourth that he had by Bersabe was appointed for his successor Genes 29 and 9. Exod 1. 2. Reg. 5. 1. Paral. 3. So that in very deed we have here both our two cases that were propounded in the begining over ruled and determined by authority and example of holy writ it selfe namely and 1