Partner in the Soveraign Power because he molested the Eastern Christians by which act of his he declared thus much at least That one Magistrate might punish another for he for his Subjects take punished â—icinius who to all intents was as abso 〈◊〉 in the Empire as himself and did not leave the vengeance to God alone Licinius might have done the same to Constantine if there had been the like occasion So then if the matter be not wholly reserved to Gods own Tribunal but that men have something to do in the case why did not the Parliament of England stand in the same relation to King Charles that Constantine did to Licinius The Soldiers made Constantine what he was But our Laws have made our Parliaments equal nay superior to our Kings The Inhabitants of Constantinople resisted Constantius an Arrian Emperour by force of Arms as long as they were able they opposed Hermogenes whom he had sent with a Military power to depose Paul an Orthodox Bishop the house whither he had betaken himself for security they fired about his ears and at last killed him right out Constans threatned to make War upon his Brother Constantius unless he would restore Paul and Athanasius to their Bishopricks You see those holy Fathers when their Bishopricks were in danger were not ashamed to stir up their Prince's own Brother to make War upon him Not long after the Christian Soldiers who then made whom they would Emperors put to death Constans the Son of Constantinus because he behaved himself dissolutely and proudly in the Government and Translated the Empire to Magnentius Nay those very persons that saluted Julian by the name of Emperour against Constantius his will who was actually in possession of the Empire for Julian was not then an Apostate but a vertuous and valiant person are they not amongst the number of those Primitive Christians whose Example you propose to us for our imitation which action of theirs when Constantius by his Letters to the people very sharply and earnestly forbad which Letters were openly read to them they all cried out unanimously That themselves had but done what the Provincial Magistrates the Army and the Authority of the Commonwealth had decreed The same persons declared War against Constantius and contributed as much as in them lay to deprive him both of his Government and his Life How did the Inhabitants of Antioch behave themselves who were none of the worst sort of Christians I 'le warrant you they prayed for Julian after he became an Apostate whom they used to rail at in his own presence and scoffing at his long Beard bid him make Ropes of it Upon the news of whose death they gave publick Thanksgivings made Feasts and gave other publick Demonstrations of Joy do you think they used when he was alive to pray for the continuance of his life and health Nay is it not reported that a Christian Soldier in his own Army was the Author of his Death Sozomen a Writer of the Ecclesiastical History does not deny it but commends him that did it if the fact were so For it is no wonder says he that some of his own Soldiers might think within himself that not only the Greeks but all Mankind hitherto had agreed that it was a commendable action to kill a Tyrant and that they deserve all mens praise who are willing to die themselves to procure the liberty of all others so that that Soldier ought not rashly to be condemned who in the cause of God and of Religion was so zealous and valiant These are the words of Sozomen a good and Religious man of that age by which we may easily apprehend what the general opinion of pious men in those days was upon this point Ambrose himself being commanded by the Emperour Valentinian the Younger to depart from Milan refused to obey him but defended himself and the Palace by force of Arms against the Emperour's Officers and took upon him contrary to his own Doctrine to resist the higher powers There was a great sedition raised at Constantinople against the Emperour Areadius more than once by reason of Chrysostom's Exile Hitherto I have shewn how the Primitive Christians behaved themselves towards Tyrants how not only the Christian Soldiers and the people but the Fathers of the Church themselves have both made War upon them and opposed them with force and all this before St. Austin's time for you your self are pleased to go down no lower and therefore I make no mention of Valentinian the Son of Placidia who was slain by Maximus a Senator for committing Adultery with his Wife nor do I mention Avitus the Emperour whom because he disbanded the Soldiers and betook himself wholly to a luxurious life the Roman Senate immediately deposed because these things came to pass some years after St. Austin's death But all this I give you Suppose I had not mentioned the practice of the Primitive Christians suppose they never had stirred in opposition to Tyrants suppose they had accounted it unlawful so do I will make it appear that they were not such persons as that we ought to â—ely upon their Authority or can safely follow their Example Long before Constantine's time the generality of Christians had lost much of the Primitive Sanctity and integity both of their Doctrine and Manners Afterwards when he had vastly enriched the Church they began to fall in love with Honour and Civil Power and then the Christian Religion went to wrack First Luxury and Sloth and then a great drove of Herches and Immoralities broke loose among them and these begot Envy Hatred and Discord which abounded every where At last they that were linked together into one Brotherhood by that holy band of Religion were as much at variance and strife amongst themselves as the most bitter Enemies in the world could be No reverence for no consideration of their duty was left amongst them the Soldiers and Commanders of the Army as oft as they pleased themselves created new Emperors and sometimes killed good ones as well as bad I need not mention such as Verannio Alaximus Eugenius whom the Soldiers all on a sudden advanced and made them Emperors nor Gratian an excellent Prince nor Valentinian the younger who was none of the worst and yet were put to death by them It is true these things were acted by the Soldiers and Soldiers in the field but those Soldiers were Christians and lived in that Age which you call Evangelical and whose example you propose to us for our imitation Now you shall hear how the Clergy managed themselves Pastors and Bishops and sometimes those very Fathers whom we admire and extol to so high a degree every one of whom was a Leader of their several Flocks those very men I say fought for their Bishopricks as Tyrants did for their Soveraignty sometimes throughout the City sometimes in the very Churches sometimes at the Altar Clergy-men and Lay-men fought promiscuously they slew one another and great
that may save in all thy cities and thy judges of whom thou saidest give me a king and princes I gave thâ—â— a king in mine anger and took him 〈…〉 my wrath And Gidem that warlike Judg that was greater than a King I will not rule over you says he 〈…〉 shall my son rule over you the Lord shall rule over you Judges Chap the 8th Intimating thereby that it is not fit for a man but for God only to exercise Dominion over men And hence Josephus in his Book against Aâ—… an Egyptian Grammarian and a â—oulmouth'd fellow like you calls the Commonwealth of the Hebrews a Theocracy because the principality was in God only In Isaiah Chap. 26. v. 13. The people in their repentance complain that it had been mischievous to them that other Lords besides God himself had had Dominion over them All which places prove clearly that God gave the Israelites a King in his anger but now who can forbear laughing at the use you make of Abimelech's story Of whom it is said when he was kill'd partly by a woman that hurl'd a piece of a Mill-stone upon him and partly by his own Armour-Bearer that God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech This History say you proves strongly that God only is the Judge and Avenger of Kings Yea if this Argument holds he is the only Judge and Punisher of Tyrants Villanous Rascals and Bastards whoever can get into the Saddle whether by right or by wrong has thereby obtain'd a Soveraign Kingly right over the people is out of all danger of punishment all inferior Magistrates must lay down their Arms at his feet the people must not dare to mutter But what if some great notorious robber had perished in War as Abimelech did would any man infer from thence That God only is the Judge and Punisher of High-way men Or what if Abimelech had been condemn'd by the Law and died by an Executioner's hand would not God then have rendred his wickedness You never read that the Judges of the Children of Israel were ever proceeded against according to Law And yet you confess That where the Government is an Aristocracy the Prince if there be any may and ought to be call'd in question if he break the Laws This in your 47th Page And why may not a Tyrant as well be proceeded against in a Kingly Government Why because God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech So did the Women and so did his own Armour-bearer over both which he pretended to a right of Soveraignty And what if the Magistrates had rendred his wickedness Do not they bear the Sword for that very purpose for the punishment of Malefactors Having done with his powerful argument from the History of Abimelech's death he bâ—takes himself as his custom is to Slanders and Calumnies nothing but dirt and filth comes from him but for those things that he promis'd to make appear he hath not prov'd any one of them either from the Scriptures or from the Writings of the Rabbins He alledges no reason why Kings should be above all Laws and they only of all mortal men exempt from punishment if they deserve it He falls foul upon those very Authors and Authorities that he makes use of and by his own Discourse demonstrates the truth of the opinion that he argues against And perceiving that he is like to do but little good with his arguments he endeavours to bring an odium upon us by loading us with slanderous accusations as having put to death the most Vertuous innocent Prince that ever reign'd VVas King Solomon says he better than King Charles the First I confess some have ventur'd to compare his Father King James with Solomon nay to make King James the better Gentleman of the 〈◊〉 Solomon was David's Son David had been Sauâ—… â—…n but king James was the Son of the End of Darly who as â—uchanan tells us because Dâ—… the Musitian get into the Queen's Bed-Chamber at an unseasonable time kill'd him a little after he could not get to him then because he had Bolted the Door on the inside So that King James being the Son of an Earâ— was the better Gentleman and was frequently called a second Solomon though it is not very certain that himself was not the Son of David the Musitian too But how could it ever come into your head to make a comparison betwixt King Câ—ries and Solomon For that very King Charles whom you praise thus to the sky that very man's obâ—…acy and covetousness and cruelty his hard usage of all good and honest men the Wars that he rais'd the Spoilings and Plunderings and Conflagrations that he occasioned and the death of innumerable of his Subjects that he was the cause of does his Son Charles at this very time whilest I 'm a writing confess and bewail in the Stool of Repentance in Scotland and renounces there that Kingly right that you assert but since you delight in Parallels let 's compare King Charles and King Solomon together a little Solomon began his reign with the death of his Brother who had justly deserved it King Charles began his with his Father's Funeral I do not say with his Murder and yet all the marks and tokens of Poyson that may be appeared in his dead body but the suspition lighted upon the Duke of Buckingham only whom the 〈◊〉 notwithstanding cleared to the Parliament though he had killed the King and his Father and not only soâ— but he dissolved the Parliament lest the matter should be enquired into Solomon oppressed the people with heavy Taxes but he spent that â—…upon the Temple of God and in raising other publick Buildings King Charles spent his in Extravag 〈◊〉 Solomon was enticed to Idolatry by many Wives This man by one Solomon though he were seduced himself we read not that he seduced others but King Charles seduced and enticed others not only by large and ample rewards to corrupt the Church but by his Edicts and Ecclesiastical Constitutions he compelled them to set up Altars which all Protestants abhor and to bow down to Crucifixes painted over them on the Wall But yet for all this Solomon was not condemned to die Nor does it follow because he was not that therefore he ought not to have been Perhaps there were many Circumstances that made it then not expedient But not long after the people both by words and actions made appear what they took to be their right when Ten Tribes of Twelve revolted from his Son and if he had not saved himself by flight it is very likely they would have stoned him notwithstanding his Threats and big swelling words CHAP. III. HAving proved sufficiently that the Kings of the Jews were subject to the same Laws that the people were That there are no exceptions made in Scripture That 't is a most false assertion grounded upon no reason nor warranted by any Authority to say That Kings may do what they list with Impunity That God has exempted them
as that with the same breath that you commend the Obedience and Submissiveness of those Nations of your own accord you make mention of Sardanapalus'r being deprived of his Crown by Arbaces Neither was it he alone that accomplished that Enterprise for he had the assistance of the Priests who of all others were best versed in the Law and of the people and it was wholly upon this account that he deposed him because he abused his authority and power not by giving himself over to cruelty but to luxury and effeminacy Run over the Histories of Herodotus Ctâ—sias Diodorus and you will find things quite contrary to what you assert here you will find that those Kingdoms were destroyed for the most part by subjects and not by foreigners that the Assyrians were brought down by the Medes who then were their subjects and the Medes by the Persians who at that time were like wise subject to them Your self confess that Cyrus rebell'd and that at the same time in divers parts of the Empire little upstart Governments were formed by those that shook off the Medes But does this agree with what you said before does this prove the obedience of the Medes and Persians to their Princes and that Jus Regium which you had asserted to have been universally received amongst those Nations What Potion can cure this brainsâ—… frenzy of yours You say It appears by Herodotus how absolute the Persian Kings were Cambyses being desirous to marry his Sister consulted with the Judges who were the Interpreters of the Laws to whose Judgment all difficult matters were to be referred What answer had he from them They told him They knew no Law which permitted a Brother to marry his Sister but another Law they knew that the Kings of Persia might do what they listed Now to this I answer if the Kings of Persia were really so absolute what need was there of any other to interpret the Laws besides the King himself Those superfluous unnecessary Judges would have had their abode and residence in any other place rather than in the Palace where they were altogether useless Agâ—in if those Kings might do what ever they would it is not credible that so ambitious a Prince as Cambyses was should be so ignorant of that grand Prerogative as to consult with the Judges whether what he desired were according to Law What was the matter then either they designed to humour the King as you say they did or they were afraid to cross his inclination which is the account that Herodotus gives of it and so told him of such a Law as they knew would please him and in plain terms made a fool of him which is no new thing with Judges and Lawyers now a days But say you Artabanus a Persian told Themistocles that there was no better Law in Persia than that by which it was Enacted That Kings were to be honoured and adored An excellent Law that was without doubt which commanded subjects to adore their Princes but the Primitive Fathers have long ago damned it and Artabanus was a proper person to commend such a Law who was the very man that a little while after slew Xerxes with his own hand You quote Regicides to assert Royalty I am afraid you have some design upon Kings In the next place you quote the Poet Claudian to prove how obedient the Persians were But I appeal to their Histories and Annals which are full of the Revolts of the Persians the Medes the Bactrians and Babylonians and give us frequent instances of the Murders of their Princes The next person whose authority you cite is Otanes the Persian who likewise killed Smerdis then King of Persia to whom out of the hatred which he bore to a Kingly Government he reckons up the impieties and injurious actions of Kings their violation of all Laws their putting men to death without a legal conviction their rapes and adulteries and all this you will have called the right of Kings and slander Samuel again as a teacher of such Doctrine You quote Homer who says that Kings derive their authority from Jupiter to which I have already given an answer For King Philip of Macedon whose asserting the right of Kings you make use of I 'le believe Charles his description of it as soon as his Then you quote some Sentences out of a fragment of Diogenes a Pythagorean but you do not tell us what sort of a King he speaks of Observe therefore how he begins that Discourse for whatever follows must be understood to have relation to it Let him be King says he that of all others is most just and so he is that acts most according to Law for no man can be King that is not just and without Laws there can be no Justice This is directly opposite to that Regal right of yours And Ecphantas whom you likewise quote is of the same opinion Whosoever takes upon him to be a King ought to be naturally most pure and clear from all imputation And a little after Him says he we call a King that governs well and he only is properly so So that such a King as you speak of according to the Philosophy of the Pythagoreans is no King at all Hear now what Plato says in his eighth Epistle Let Kings says he be liable to be called to account for what they do Let the Laws controul not only the people but Kings themselves if they do any thing not warranted by Law I 'le mention what Aristotle says in the Third Book of his Politicks It is neither for the Publick Good nor is it just says he where all men are by nature alike and equal that any one should be Lord and Master over all the rest neither where there are no Laws nor is it for the Publick Good or Just that one man should be a Law to the rest nor is it so where there are Laws nor that any one tho a good man thould be Lord over other good mâ—n nor a bad man over bad men And in the Fifth Book says he That King whom the people refuse to be govern'd by is no longer a King but a Tyrant Hear what Xenophon says in Hiero People are so far from revenging the Deaths of Tyrants that they confer great Honour upon him that Kills one and erect Statues in their Temples to the Honour of Tyrannicides Of this I can produce an 〈◊〉 witness Marcus Tullius in his Oration pro Milone The Grecians says he ascribe Divine Worship to such as kill Tyrants What things of this nature have 〈◊〉 my self seen at Athens and in other Cities of Greece How many Religious Observances have been inâ—…ted in honour of such men How many Hymns They are consecrated to Immortality and Adoration and their Memory endeavoured to be perpetuated And â—…ly Polybius an Historian of great Authority and Gravity in the Sixth Book of his 〈◊〉 says thus When Princes began to in 〈◊〉 their own Lusts and sensual Appetites then â—…doms
were turned into so many Tyrannies and the Subjects began to conspire the Death of their Governors neither were they the profligate sort sort that were the Authors of those Designs but the most Generous and Magnanimous I could quote many 〈◊〉 like passage but I shall instance in no more 〈…〉 Philosophers you appeal to the Poets and 〈…〉 willing to follow you thither Aeschylus 〈…〉 to inform us That the Power of the Kings of 〈…〉 as not to be liable to the censure of any 〈…〉 questioned before any Human Judicature â—…gedy that is called The Suppliants calls 〈…〉 Argives a Governor not obnoxious to th◠〈…〉 any Tribunal But you must know for 〈…〉 you say the more you discover your rashness and want of judgment you must know I say that one is not to regard what the Poet says but what person in the Play speaks and what that person says for different persons are introduced sometimes good sometimes bad sometimes wise men sometimes fools and such words are put into their mouths as it is most proper for them to speak not such as the Poet would speak if he were to speak in his own person The Fifty Daughters of Danaus being banished out of Egypt became Suppliants to the King of the Argives they begg'd of him that he would protect them from the Egyptians who pursued them with a Fleet of Ships The King told them he could not undertake their Protection till he had imparted the matter to the people For says he if I should make a promise to you I should not be able to perform it unless I consult with them first The Women being Strangers and Suppliants and fearing the uncertain suffrages of the people tell him That the Power of all the people resides in him alone that he judges all others but is not judged himself by any He answers I have told you already That I cannot do this thing that you desire of me without the peoples consent nay and tho I could I would not At last he refers the matter to the people I will assemble the people says he and persuade them to protect you The people met and resolved to engage in their quarrel insomuch that Danaus their Father bids his Daughters be of good cheer for the people of the Countrey in a Popular Convention had voted their Safeguard and Defence If I had not related the whole thing how rashly would this impertinent Ignoramus have determined concerning the Right of Kings among the Grecians out of the mouths of a few Women that were Strangers and Suppliants tho the King himself and the History be quite contrary The same thing appears by the story of Orestes in Euripides who after his Father's Death was himself King of the Argives and yet was called in question by the people for the death of his Mother and made to plead for his Life and by the major suffrage was condemned to dye The same Poet in his Play called The Suppliants declares That at Athens the Kingly Power was subject to the Laws where Theseus then King of that City is made to say these words This is a free City it is not governed by one man the people reigns here And his Son Demophoon who was King after him in another Tragedy of the same Poet called Hâ—raclidae I do not exercise a Tyrannical power over them as if they were Barbarians I am upon other terms with them but if I do them Justice they will do me the like Sophocles in his Oedipus shows That anciently in Thebes the Kings were not absolute neither Hence says Tiresias to Oedipus I am not your Slave And Creon to the same King I have some Right in this City says he as well as you And in another Tragedy of the same Poet called Antigone Aemon tells the King That the City of Thebes is not govern'd by a single person All men know that the Kings of Lacedemon have been arraigned and sometimes put to death judicially These instances are sufficient to evince what Power the Kings in Greece had Let us consider now the Romans You betake your self to that passage of C. Memmius in Salust of Kings having a liberty to do what they list and go unpunished to which I have given an answer already Salust himself says in express words That the Ancient Government of Rome was by their Laws tho the Name and Form of it was Regal which form of Government when it grew into a Tyranny you know they put down and changed Cicero in his Oration against Piso Shall I says he account him a Consul who would not allow the Senate to have any Authority in the Common-wealth Shall I take notice of any man as Consul if at the same there be no such thing as a Senate when of old the City of Rome acknowledged not their Kings if they acted without or in opposition to the Senate Do you hear the very Kings themselves at Rome signified nothing without the Senate But say you Romulus governed as he listed and for that you quote Tacitus No wonder The Government was not then established by Law they were a confus'd multitude of strangers more like than a State and all mankind lived without Laws before Governments were setled But when Romulus was dead tho all the people were desirous of a King not having yet experienced the sweetness of Liberty yet as Livy informs us The Soveraign Power resided in the People so that they parted not with more Right than they retained The same Author tells us That that same Power was afterwards extorted from them by their Emperours Servius Tullius at first reigned by fraud and as it were a Deputy to Tarquinius Priscus but afterward he referred it to the people Whether they would have him reign or no At last says Tacitus he became the Author of such Laws as the Kings were obliged to obey Do you think he would have done such an injury to himself and his Posterity if he had been of opinion that the Right of Kings had been above all Laws Their last King Tarquinius Superbus was the first that put an end to that custom of consulting the Senate concerning all Publick Affairs for which very thing and other enormities of his the people deposed him and banished him and his Family These things I have out of Livy and Cicero than whom you will hardly produce any better Expositors of the Right of Kings among the Romans As for the Dictatorship that was but Temporary and was never made use of but in great extremities and was not to continue longer than six months But that thing which you call the Right of the Roman Emperors was no Right but a plain downright Force and was gained by War only But Tacitus say you that lived under the Government of a single person writes thus The Gods have committed the Sovereign Power in human Affairs to Princes only and have left to Subjects the honour of being obedient But you tell us not where Tacitus has these
words for you were conscious to your self that you imposed upon your Readers in quoting them which I presently smelt out tho I could not find the place of a sudden For that Expression is not Tacitus's own who is an approved Writer and of all others the 〈◊〉 Enemy to Tyrants but Tacitus relates that â—…us a Gentleman of Rome being accused for a Capital Crime amongst other things that he said to save his life flattered Tiberius on this manner it is in the Sixth Book of his Annals The Gods have entrusted you with the ultimate Judgment in all things they have left us the honour of obedience And you cite this passage as if Tacitus had said it himself you 〈◊〉 together whatever seems to make for your Opinion either out of oftentation or out of weakness you would leave out nothing that you could find in a Baker's or a Barber's Shop â—ay you would be glad of any thing that looked like an Argument from the Hang-man himself If you would have read Tacitus himself and not have transcribed some loose Quotations out of him by other Authors he would have taught you whence that Imperial Right had its Original After the Conquest of Asia says he the whole state of our Affairs was turned upside down nothing of the ancient integrity of our Forefathers was left amongst us all men shook off that former equality which had been observed and began to have a reverence for the Mandates of Princes This you might have learned out of the Third Book of his Annals whence you have all your Regal Right When that ancient equality was laid aside and instead thereof Ambition and Violence took place Tyrannical Forms of Government started up and fixed themselves in many Countries This same thing you might have learned out of Dio if your natural Levity and Unsetledness of Judgment would have suffered you to apprehend any thing that 's solid He tells us in his Fifty third Book of his History out of which book you have made some quotation already That Octavius Caesar partly by Force and partly by Fraud brought things to that pass that the Emperors of Rome became no longer fettered by Laws For he tho he promised to the people in publick that he would lay down the Government and obey the Laws and become subject to others yet under pretence of making War in several Provinces of the Empire still retained the Legions and so by degrees invaded the Government which he pretended he would forgo This was not regularly getting from under the Law but breaking forcibly through all Laws as Spartacus the Gladiator might have done and then assuming to himself the style of Prince or Emperor as if God or the Law of Nature had put all men and all Laws into subjection under him Would yoâ— enquire a little further into the Original of the Right of the Roman Emperors Mircus Antonius whom Caesar when by taking up Arms against the Commonwealth he had got all the Power into his hands had made Consul when a Solemnity called the Luperelia was celebrated at Rome as had been contrived before-hand that he should set a Crown upon Caesar's head though the people sighed and lamented at the sight and caused it to be entred upon record That Mirous Antonius at the Lupercalia made Caesar King at the Instance of the people Of which action Cicero in his second Philippick Was Lucius Tarquinius therefore expelled says he Spurius Cassius Sp. Milius and Marcus Manilius put to death that after many ages Marcus Antonius should make a King in Rome contrary to Law But you deserve to be tortured and loaded with everlasting disgrace much more than Mark Antony tho I would not have you proud because he and your self are put together for I do not think so despicable a Wretch as you fit to be compared with him in any thing but Impiety you that in those horrible Lupercalia of yours set not a Crown upon one Tyrant's head but upon all and such a Crown as you would have limited by no Laws nor liable to any Indeed if we must believe the Oracles of the Emperors themselves for so some Christian Emperors as Theodosius and Valens have called their Edicts â—od lib. 1. tit 14. the Authority of the Emperors depends upon that of the Law So that the Majesty of the Person that reigns even by the Judgment or call it the Oracle of the Emperors themselves must submit to the Laws on whose Authority it depends Hence Pliny tells Trajan in his Panegyrick when the Power of the Emperors was grown to its height A Principality and an Absolute Sovereignty are quite different things Trajan puts down whatever looks like a Ringdom he rules like a Prince that there may be no room for a Magisterial Power And afterwards Whatever I have said of other Princes I said that I might show how our Prince reforms and corrects the Manners of Princes which by long custom have been corrupted and depraved Are not you ashamed to call that the Right of Kings that Pliny calls the corrupt and depraved Customs of Princes But let this suffice to have been said in short of the Right of Kings as it was taken at Rome How they dealt with their Tyrants whether Kings or Emperors is generally known They expelled Tarquin But say you How did they expel him Did they proceed against him judicially No such matter When he would have come into the City they shut the gates against him Ridiculous Fool What could they do but shut the gates when he was hastning to them with part of the Army And what great difference will there be whether they banished him or put him to death so they punished him one way or other The best men of that age kill'd Caesar the Tyrant in the very Senate Which action of theirs Marcus Tullius who was himself a very excellent man and publickly call'd the Father of his Countrey both elsewhere and particularly in his second Philippick extols wonderfully I 'll repeat some of his words All good Men kill'd Caesar as far as in them lay Some Men could not advise in it others wanted Courage to act in it others wanted an Opportunity all had a good will to it And afterwards What greater and more glorious Action ye holy gods ever was performed not in this City only but in any other Country what Action more worthy to be recommended to everlasting memory I am not unwilling to be included within the number of those that advised it as within the Trojan Horse The passage of Seneca may relate both to the Romans and the Grecians There cannot be a greater nor more acceptable Sacrifice offered up to Jupiter than a wicked Prince For if you consider Hercules whose words these are They shew what the Opinion was of the principal Men amongst the Grecians in that Age If the Poet who flourished under Nero and the most worthy Persons in Plays generally express the Poet 's own Sense then this passage shows us
at all Now you say That you will discourse by and by of the difference betwixt some Kings and others in point of Powâ—r some having had more some less You say You will prove that Kings cannot be judged nor câ—ndemn'd by their own Subjects by a most solid Argument but you do it by a very silly one and 't is this You say There was no other difference than that betwixt the Judges and the Kings of the Jews and yet the reason why the Jews required to have Kings over them was because they were weary of their Judges and hated their Government Do you think that because they might Judge and Condemn their Judges if they misbehaved themselves in the Government they therefore hated and were weary of them and would be under Kings whom they should have no Power to restrain and keep within Bounds tho they should break through all Laws Who but you ever argued so childishly So that they desired a King for some other reason than that they might have a Master over them whose Power should be superior to that of the Law which reason what it was it is not to our present purpose to make a Conjecture Whatever it was both God and his Prophets tells us it was no piece of prudence in the People to desire a King And now you fall foul upon your Rabbins and are very angry with them for saying That a King might be judged and condemned to undergo Stripes out of whose Writings you said before you had proved that the Kings of the Jews could not be judged Wherein you confess that you told a lye when you said you had proved any such thing out of their Writings Nay you come at last to forget the Subject you were upon of writing in the King's Defence and raise little impertinent Controversies about Solomon's Stales and how may Stalls he had for his Horses Then of a Jocky you become a Ballad-singer again or rather as I said before a raving distracted Cuckoo You complain That in these latter Ages Discipline has been more remiss and the Rule less observed and kept up to to wit because one Tyrant is not permitted without a â—heck from the Law to let loose the Roms of all Discipline and corrupt all Mens manners This Doctrine you say the Brownists introduced amongst those of the â—eform'd Religion so that Luther Calvin Zumâ—lius Bucer and all the most Celebrated Orthodox Divines are Brownists in your Opinion The English have the less reason to take your Reproaches ill because they hear you belching out the same Slanders against the most eminent Doctors of the Church and in effect against the whole Reformed Church it self CHAP. VI. AFter having discours'd upon the Law of God and of Nature and handled both so untowardly that you have got nothing by the bargain but a deserved reproach of Ignorance and Knavery I cannot apprehend what you can have farther to alledg in defence of your Royal Cause but meer trifles I for my part hope I have given satisfaction already to all good and learned men and shall have done this Noble cause Right should I break off here yet lest I should seem to any to decline your variety of arguing and ingenuity rather than your immoderate impertinence and tittle-tattle I 'le follow you where ever you have a mind to go but with such brevity as shall make it appear that after having perform'd whatever the necessary defence of the Cause required if not what the dignity of it merited I now do but comply with some mens expectation if not their curiosity Now say you I shall alledg other and greater arguments What greater arguments than what the Law of God and Nature afforded Help Lucina The mountain Salmasius is in labour It is not for nothing that he has got a she-husband Mortals expect some extraordinary birth If he that is and is called a King might be accused before any other power that power must of necessity be greater than that of the King and if so then must that power be indeed the Kingly power and ought to have the name of it For a Kingly power is thus defined to wit the Supreme power in the State residing in a single person and which has no superior O ridiculous birth a Mouse crept out of the Mountain Help Grammarians one of your number is in danger of perishing The Law of God and of Nature are safe but Salmasius his Dictionary is undone What if I should answer you thus That words ought to give place to things that we having taken away Kingly Government it self do not think our selves concerned about its name and definition let others look to that who are in love with Kings We are contented with the enjoyment of our Liberty such an answer would be good enough for you But to let you see that I deal fairly with you throughout I will answer you not only from my own but from the opinion of very wise and good men who have thought that the name and power of a King are very consistent with a power in the people and the Law superior to that of the King himself In the first place Lycurgus a man very eminent for his wisdom designing as Plato says to secure a Kingly Government as well as it was possible could find no better expedient to preserve it than by making the power of the Senate and of the Ephori that is the power of the people superior to it Theseus in Euripedes King of Athens was of the same opinion for he to his great honour restored the people to their liberty and advanced the power of the people above that of the King and yet left the Regal Power in that City to his Posterity Whence Euripedes in his Play called the Suppliants introduceh him speaking on this manner I have advanced the people themselves into the Throne having freed the City from Slavery and admitted the people to a share in the Government by giving them an equal right of Suffrage And in another place to the Herald of Thebes In the first place says he you begin your Speech Friend with a thing that is not true in stiling me a Monarch for this City is not governed by a single person but is a free State the people reigns here These were his words when at the same time he was both called and really was King there The Divine Plato likewise in his Eight Epistle Lycurgus says he introduced the power of the Senate and of the Ephori a thing very preservative of Kingly Government which by this means hath honourably flourished for so many ages because the Law in effect was made King Now the Law cannot be King unless there be some who if there should be occasion may put the Law in execution against the King A Kingly Government so bounded and limited he himself commends to the Sicilians Let the people enjoy their Liberty under a Kingly Government let the King himself be accountable let the Law take place
cause from preserving the State which when it was in a tottering condition and almost quite reduced to Slavery and utter ruin the whole body of the people had at first committed to their fidelity prudence and courage And they acted their parts like men they set themselves in opposition to the unruly wilfulness the rage the secret designs of an inveterate and exasperated King they prefer'd the common liberty and safety before their own they out-did all former Parliaments they out-did all their Ancestors in Conduct Magnanimity and steddiness to their cause Yet these very men did a great part of the people ungratefully desert in the midst of their undertaking though they had promised them all fidelity all the help and assistance they could afford them These were for Slavery and peace with sloth and luxury upon any terms Others demanded their Liberty nor would accept of a peace that was not sure and honourable What should the Parliament do in this case ought they to have defended this part of the people that was sound and continued faithful to them and their Country or to have sided with those that deserted both I know what you will say they ought to have done You are not Eurulochus but Elpenor a miserable Enchanted Beast a filthy Swine accustomed to a sordid Slavery even under a Woman so that you have not the least relish of true Magnanimity nor consequently of Liberty which is the effect of it You would have all other men slaves because you find in your self no generous ingenuous inclinations you say nothing you breath nothing but what 's mean and servile You raise another scruple to wit That he was the King of Scotland too whom we condemn'd as if he might therefore do what he would in England But that you may conclude this Chapter which of all others is the most weak and insipid at least with some witty querk There are two little words say you that are made up of the same number of Letters and differ only in the placing of them but whose significations are wide asunder to wit Vis and Jus might and right 'T is no great wonder that such a three letter'd man as you Fur a Thief should make such a Witticism upon three Letters 'T is the greater wonder which yet you assert throughout your Book that two things so directly opposite to one another as those two are should yet meet and become one and the same thing in Kings For what violence was ever acted by Kings which you do not affirm to be their Right These are all the passages that I could pick out of nine long Pages that I thought deserved an answer The rest consists either of repetitions of things that have been answered more than once or such as have no relation to the matter in hand So that my being more brief in this Chapter than in the rest is not to be imputed to want of diligence in me which how irksome soever you are to me I have not slackned but to your tedious impertinence so void of matter and sense CHAP. XII I Wish Salmasius that you had left out this part of your Discourse concerning the King's crimes which it had been more advisable for your self and your party to have done for I 'm afraid lest in giving you an answer to it I should appear too sharp and severe upon him now he is dead and hath received his punishment But since you chose rather to discourse confidently and at large upon that Subject I 'le make you sensible that you could not have done a more inconsiderate thing than to reserve the worst part of your cause to the last to wit that of ripping up and enquiring into the Kings Crimes which when I shall have proved them to have been true and most exorbitant they will render his memory unpleasant and odious to all good men and imprint now in the close of the Controversie a just hatred of you who undertake his defence on the Readers minds Say you His accusation may be divided into two parts one is conversant about his Morals the other taxeth him with such â—…lts as he might commit in his publick capacity I 'le be 〈◊〉 to pass by in silence that part of his life that he spent in Banqueâ—tings at Plays and in the conversation of Women for what can there be in Luxury and Excess worth relating And what would those things have been to us if he had been a private person But since he would be a King as he could not live a private life so neither could his Vices be like those of a private person For in the first place he did a great deal of mischief by his example In the second place all that time that he spent upon his lust and in his sports which was a great part of his time he stole from the State the Government of which he had undertaken Thirdly and lastly he squandered away vast Sums of Money which were not his own but the publick Revenue of the Nation in his Domestick Luxury and Extravagance So that in his private life at home he first began to be an ill King But let us rather pass over to those Crimes that he is charged with on the account of misgovernment Here you lament his being condemned as a Tyrant a Traytor and a Murderer That he had no wrong done him shall now be made appear But first let us define a Tyrant not according to vulgar conceits but the judgment of Aristotle and of all Learned Men. He is a Tyrant who regards his own welfare and profit only and not that of the people So Aristotle defines one in the Tenth Book of his Ethicks and elsewhere and so do very many others Whether Charles regarded his own or the peoples good these few things of many that I shall but touch upon will evince When his Rents and other publick Revenues of the Crown would not defray the Expences of the Court he laid most heavy Taxes upon the people and when they were squandred away he invented new ones not for the benefit honour or defence of the State but that he might hoard up or lavish out in one House the Riches and Wealth not of one but of three Nations When at this rate he broke loose and acted without any colour of Law to warrant his proceedings knowing that a Parliament was the only thing that could give him check he endeavoured either wholly to lay aside the very calling of Parliaments or calling them just as often and no oftner than to serve his own turn to make them entirely at his devotion Which Bridle when he had cast off himself he put another Bridle upon the people he put Garrisons of German Horse and Irish Foot in many Towns and Cities and that in time of Peace Do you think he does not begin to look like a Tyrant In which very thing as in many other Particulars which you have formerly given me occasion to instance in though you