and good for them better then their Kings who are their publick ministers and thus concluding itaque majorum rerum potestas jure populo tribuitur Therefore power of the greater things is by right the peoples 4. This may also appear by the histories and records of all Kingdoms in the world where Tyrants forc't not in by conquest and held not possession afterwards by force In the Romane state both under their Kings and Emperors the chief power in all things of highest concernment was alwayes in the Senate and people and so much Bodin grants That the people hadt he chief Soveraign power of enacting and confirming Lawes the Senates decrees being of no validity unlesse the people ratified them and if any of their Kings Consuls Emperors or Generals did things without their consent as making war concluding peace c. it did not bind but was meerly voyd unlesse the Senate and people together in a great assembly ratified the same by a publick Law But to let passe forreign examples our ancestors in this Kingdome which shewes what power was invested in the whole body of the people have not only constrained our Kings by threats yea force of armes to summon and continue Parliament but likewise compelled them to give their royal assents to Magna Charta Charta de Foresta Confirmatio Chartarum Articuli super Chart as with sundry other publick statutes of right and justice for common good and the subjects safety and to ratify them with their hands seales oathes proclamations against their will and liking which forced assents have been afterward justified and held good in law to bind these kings and their followers to the due observation thereof for where the lawes are convenient necessary or essentiall for the Kingdomes welfare the Subjects just liberty and safety and such as the King by duty and oath is bound to assent to there if they compel the King to give his assent in case of denyal the assent is binding and shall not be voyd by Duresse because the King doth no more then he is obliged by oath law and duty to condiscend unto and the people whose power is above him may justly require 5. And now in answer to Mr. Sedgwick affirming the Crown to be the Kings birth-right a thing which I utterly deny and have clear reasons against it For 1. Howsoever here in England the Crown hath gon often by discent yet never was it granted absolute successive and heretary but arbitrary and elective Hence many of our Kings have come to the crown without any hereditary title by the peoples free election and afterward obeyed as lawful Kings Thus Anno. 975. after Edgars disease not Ethelred the heir to the former King but Edward crowned So Edmund heir to King Ethelred refused and Canutus a stranger elected and crowned So Edmund and Alfred both heirs set a side and Harald and Hardiknute elected and crowned Kings I might also shew how upon the death of King Harald it was enacted by the English Nobility That none of the Danish blood should any more reign after them So after William the first not Robert the elder brother but Rufus the younger brother chosen So after the desease of Richard the first John Earl of Morton was crowned and Arthur the right heir refused The like might be manifested of other nations how their kings did not reign heretarily and by succession from father to sonne but those were chosen Kings amongst them which were held worthy which election was made by the people and revokable by them at any time and whensoever the Crown went now and then by succession it was by usurpation rather than right From humane Histories we might come to the holy Scriptures and shew that the original creation and constitution of the Isralites Kingdoms proceeded only from the authority and power of the people and that solely by Divine permission rather than institution as is apparant by Deut. 11.14 15. And howsoever the Lord did somtimes immediatly nominate the persons of those that should reign over them as Saul David Jehu Jeroboam c. yet the people did constantly confirme and make them Kings and gave them their royal authority none being made Kings by Divine appointment but such as they willingly accepted approved and confirmed to be kings Gods previous designation being but a preparative to their voluntary and free election Moreover It is very cleer that the kings of Judah and Israel were subordinate in power to the people and not only counselled but usually over-rul'd by them in al matters of publick concernment for though they asked a king yet they reserved sufficient authority to themselves to restrain him and to order and dispose of the publick affairs as they thought good But these things we have reserved to a larger treatise 2. Howsoever Bodin contrary to Aristotle Tacitus Lipsius Toloso Machavel Kirchnerus and the greatest Polititions prefers succession before election of Kings and instanceth several nations to be heretary yet this I say quo jure from the beginning it was not so for every heretary Crown is through custom not of right howsoever people have let it passe and admitted them in such a way yet this hath been still in the people a free act and it was in their liberty and power to have chosen any other 3. Whereas some Kings require an oath of their subjects that their heirs and successors shall enjoy the Crown after them and the grounds of taking this oath is upon an opinion that the Crown goes by succession from father to child so that in their understanding they give not any thing away from themselves but only acknowledg what they conceive the person already is Now this oath being given and taken upon a false ground cannot bind in point of conscience because if they knew it was not the others right they would not swear neither meant they in the least to pass away any thing of their own right for they thought it was the others properly before And here by the way observe how vain and groundlesse that common question pro and con is amongst Polititians Statists Civilians and some Divines whether succession or election be the better as if truly and rightly there were some such thing as succession whereas it is neither so nor so I confesse after a Kings desease the people may elect and crown the son and his sons son but that any such thing can be claimed or chalenged as a birth-right it is altogether untrue there is no Kingdom in the world where the crown descends from the father to the son by any true and proper succession the most that can be is not simple succession but a succession limitable and conditional that is a promise on the peoples part for some considerable causes that the son shall be crowned after the fathers death if he be fit to govern and they see it is for their good But that any people should absolutely bind themselves to have the son reign over
have done had not the people power to hinder censure and depose them for their sins It is said of Amaziah King of Judah 2 King 14.19 That they made a conspiracie against him in Jerusalem and he fled to Lachish but they sent after him to Lachish and slew him there not privatly but openly as acted by publick authority for his great impiety as having broken his oath and covenant whereupon we reade not of any complaint inquisition proceeding or punishment inflicted on those that slew him after his death either by the people or his children as there was upon those that slew king Ammnon but being slaine they to wit the persons who had put him to death brought him on horses and he was buried in Jerusalem and all the people of Judah made Ahaziah King in his stead Which plainly shews that what was formerly done by the greater part of the States at Jerusalem was afterwards confirmed by common consent and executed by command of those which might lawfully do it Fourthly For examples all histories are full nothing more frequent than to reade how people having the supream power would judiciously convent censure depose yea and judge their kings to death for their evil and wicked courses Thus amongst the Romans the Senate and people together proceeded against Nero Julianus Vitellius Maximinius Heliogabulus c. I speak not of Traquin the proud expelled the kingdome by the people So other Emperours likewise being found unfit unable to govern the kingdom have been deposed and others elected and crowned in their stead as Cbilderiek Charles the third Justinus the second Wenceslaus all put off and Pepin Arnolph Fiberius and Rupert Count Palatine of Rhine chosen and set in the Empire The Cumaen State usually arraigned and punished their Kings juditially if they saw cause Thus the French by authority of a publick Councel through the prudent care of the officers of the Realm deposed Childerick the first Sigebert Theodorick and Childerick the third So Gyl for his grievous taxes and other miscarriages they chased into Soysons Theoduricus because he vexed and oppressed the people was by the authority of the State deprived of all dignity Touching the Kings of Spain we shall finde in Histories and good Authors that frequently for their tyrranny and misgovernment they were deposed by their subjects as Theo-discle the tenth Vttiza and other Gotish Kings as infamous monsters were chased from their thrones So Don Pedro the first Ordogno Alphonso the great Astronomer kings of Castile for their cruelties murders and treacheries all rejected and deprived of their Realms Ramir of Leon and Garcia King of Gallieia both deposed for their vitious and base doings In Hungaria Peter the second and Solomon the first to omit some others for their great insolencies and injustice were both deposed the first afterwards banished and the other kept in prison till he died So the Bohemians deposed and banished Boleslaus Rufus Berzinogius Sobeislaus Vladislaus and twise imprisoned Wenceslaus for his drunkennesse neglegence and cruelty In Poland the people have deposed imprisoned or expelled out of the kingdom many of their Kings for their oppressions and injustice as amongst others Miesco their second King Boleslaus his son Myoslaus Henrie c. Neither have the Swedish Kings been used otherwise but for their cruelty treachery and tyranny have been thrust out of their thrones and Realm by the people as Halsten Aminander Burgerius Magnus Henry Christierne the first and second and others elected and crowned in their stead So in Denmark Humbus Ericus Christierne father and son censured and deposed by the State for their licenciousnesse and misgovernment Not to mention Canutus Magnus Suano put to death by the people I passe over Canades King of Persia Dionysius the younger King of Sicile Timocrates of Cyrene Andronicus Emperour of Constantinople by the people rejected upon just cause For Scotland If George Bucanan and others of their own Historians write truth as there hath seldom ever bin good King thereof so very few of them begin with this mans father and so go up that ever died an natural death But touching the point in hand how frequently the Parliaments and Nobles there have questioned their Kings imprisoned deposed yea judicially censured them for their tyrannies oppressions whoredoms murders falshood and evil adminstration you may see at large in the aforesaid Bucanan some I have taken out of him as Durstus and his sons so Dardan Luctack Conarus Ramack Fereuhard Euginius Constantine Ethus Donald Lugrac Megal Edward Baliol James the third all these have been sentenced rejected I mention not such though he doth many whom the common people for their intollerable basenes murdered and put to death To which I might adde this mans Grandmother whom they imprisoned and caused to abjure and resign her Interest in the Crown and kingdom to her Infant son and at last was solemnly arraigned and condemned to death by the Parliament of England and beheaded at Fatheringham Castle all which proceedings against her as her Deposition Imprisonment ahd Execution hath hitherto been justified as lawful To come now to our own nation many examples we have upon record in our Chronicles concerning the matter in hand I shall at this time but only touch things in a brief way King Vortigen after six years raign for his negligence and evil government was deposed from his crown by his subjects and his son Vortimer chosen and crowned in his stead Speed Chron. pag. 207.266.267 Sigehert King of the sumptuous using exactions and cruelties upon his subjects was put by his place and Kenwolfe made King in his steed Speed hist. pag. 229. So Ofred King of Northumberland for his ill government was expelled by his subjects and deprived of all Kingly authority Speed pag. 245.246 Ethelred the son of Mollo so far offended his subjects that they tooke up armes against him and slew him at Cobre Beornerd King of Mercia because governed the people not by just Laws but by Tyranny was expelled the kingdom and Offa chosen and crowned Mat. Westm. pa. 275. The like was Edwins case King of Mercia and Northumberland for his misgovernment tyranny and oppression and following vaine base and wicked Councellors was removed from all kingly dignity in whose place Edgar was elected King I might have mentioned Archigallo one of our ancient Brittish Kings in times of Gentilisme for some misorders was deposed by the people when he had reigned almost five yeers and his brother Elidurus chosen in his room So Emerian another old British King deprived of all kingly honor and dignity and Yowally promoted to the crown Fabian par 2. chap. 49. p. 30.31 chap. 46. p. 34. Since the conquest as they call it King John disavowed by his Lords and Commons for wasting burning and spoyling the kingdome like an enemy electing Lewes of France for their King Speed p. 585. Edward the second for his misgovernment put down and Edward his son elected and crowned Walsing. hist.
grievous crimes and miscarriages with his partie not having any thing at all to gainsay the truth of the relation to vilifie and reproach the reporters 5. In sending us to his book we take good notic of it and what he there saith of the rich mercy to the King and his party and from it do observe how extremly he is carried away with vain fancies and publishing idle dreams to the world The Spirit speaketh expresly clearly and with fulness of certainty which evidently demonstrates that in these things he speaks not by the Spirit of God seeing his words fall to the ground In page 19. he begins to take into consideration some grounds laid down in the Remonstrance why the King is not to be received again to peace nor restored to his Office and dignity and promiseth to let them see how much their injustice is against God and themselves in that which they profess for justice 1. Saith he you insist upon this pag. 24. God hath given him so cleerly into your hands to do justice and afterward God hath given a double judgment against him c. and pag. 5. God makes hast to judgment and hath appeared at a severe avendger To this his answer is The King is the greatest sufferer in the kingdom hath God judged him and why wil you not submit to his judgement will ye take it out of Gods hand when did God chasten or judge men then give him to men to chasten again or when did Gods people fall upon punishing after God hath done it is God weary or remisse that you would have men take it into their hands Ans. 1 It is a bad consequence because a man hath bin a great sufferer therefore no more should be inflicted God punished Phaeraoh many wayes and greatly too yet he hardening his heart had afterward heavier sorer and deeper plagues 2. Men in the execution of justice upon offenders take not judgment out of Gods hand but rather indeed are Gods hand in the work 3. When God gave in a witness against Acan that he had troubled Israel howsoever that was a Divine punishment upon him yet did the people afterwards stone him to death and so the Lord turned from the fierceness of his anger 4. What weariness or remisness in executing judgement do men impute to God who having by his providence cast into their hands a principal offender if they according to his desert proceed to justice against him The truth is in his Answer there is not one word that comes directly home to the matter for which he brings it Secondly he saith You argue page 24. no remorse appearing proportionable to the offence if that could be seen you would regard it with a proportionable tenderness towards him Again you say There is no change of heart no repentance no free nor full yeelding to all the parts of a publick and religious interest This he refutes thus Herein you destroy and deny that free mercy of God upon which you have lived a long while manifest that your profession of the Gospel was indeed but in letter not in power God loves first before we can but you must receive good before you can give you know not the heart nor can you judge of the Kings principles they are too high for you If he should turn to you he should be but seven times more the child of the Devil Howsoever Mr. Sedgwick for his own turn takes some broken pieces of the Remonstrance and toucheth not the strength of the matter yet so much he takes out as he cannot answer But to the point 1. It is agreeable to Gospel truth and walking in the power thereof for Saints upon just occasion to lay open the unrighteousness of men and to endeavour that punishment may be inflicted whether it be in an eclesiastical or civil way 2. Observe the loosness of his arguing God loves first What 's the inference therefore offenders as murderers thieves c. ought not to be punished 3. If I see and tast the fruit I can easily discern what the tree is without digging to the root He tells us page 31. The speech sheweth what is within and cites Matth. 12.34 35. hence we may undoubtedly conclude that men apparently and visibly wicked are corrupt and unfound within 4. What the King's principles are which are so mysterious and deep we search not after them his known principles are known to be dangerous and destructive to the Nation he holds them without change or amendment 5. Is Mr. Sedgwick in good earnest and speaks as he thinks that the King should be seven times more the child of the Devil if he should turn to the Army What! in a condition better than they yea seven times better surely then they are very bad In pag. 12. he saith He understands not the utmost of the religion they walk in This seems to make the accusation the more probable but many others lesse prejudiced against the Army and better principled in religion know 't is false and that they are as holy and pure in conversation as he himself howbeit with lesse noise sound not a trumpet before them as the hypocrits do Thirdly He brings in the Remonstrance arguing against the accomodation because there is no equal ballance of affairs page 24. your meaning is saith he as you often express the King's forces are wholly subdued Here he is short Noble enemies require no more but to get their enemies into their power then they shew mercy for this he brings Elisha's example 2 King 6.22 and add how the Lord never brings us down but that he might restore us and lift us up again Ans. 1. It is sometimes so far from commendation to spare an enemy gotten into our hands as that not to do justice upon him exeedingly displeaseth God To omit many instances 't is memorable in Ahab's case what sad tydings the Prophet brought him for letting Benhadad to escape Thus saith the Lord Because thou hast let go out of thy hand a man whom I appointed to utter destruction therefore thy life shall go for his life and thy people for his people 1 King 20.24 So Saul his sparing of Agag when he was in his hands was one cause that the Lord did rend the Kingdom of Israel from him Again what hath been more frequently practised by noble enemies than severity and justice upon such as they have gotten into their power who of all the Kings of Canaan taken in war by Joshua were not afterwards by his appointment put to death So Samuel did Agag and Jehu Ahaziah King of Judah 3. Touching Elisha's example in sparing the Syrians it teacheth us thus much that in our own cause we must render good for evil and if our enemy hunger feed him and from his words to the King of Israel we may gather that men used not to kill such as in the field were taken captives and stood not out in hostility But there is nothing from the place to be
I shall say very little to it seeing it relates not to the publicke cause for which I have ingaged neither is it materiall to set down his words for howsoever they are a heape and a huge one too see page 32 33 34 35. yet in short it all amounts to this much He dwels in that mountaine where there is no hurtfull thing feares no surprizes being in a state not apprehensive of danger sees no evil knowes no evil he lives where there is no more curse death nor sorrow c. He can binde Kings yea the devil and cast him into the bottomlesse pit dissolve all his works and secure him within his own bounds that he shall no longer destroy the earth Christ saith If I bear witnesse of my selfe my witnesse is not true But leaving that question whither he speaks the truth this is a truth without question that in this boasting practise he walkes contrary to all sober meeke humble and self-denying Christians both past and present If this doe not argue a man to be a boaster proud heady high-minded then I know not what doth we judge the emptinesse of the vessel by the lowdnesse of the sound brasse tinckleth more then gold and a bladder is soon blown up but when it is most swoln there is nothing in it but a little ayre The tree Alpina brings forth the fairest blossomes of all trees but the bee suspects it to be venemous because it is so glorious and therefore neither tasteth it nor commeth neer it If self praysing may be admitted as a ground or reason to suspect a person so doing not to be sound Mr. Sedgwick surely more then any man I know gives cause of such a suspition in making himself so glorious with his own mouth Two things I shall here commend to the Readers observation 1. In page 49. speaking of the Army he saith Your condition is well-expressed Esay 65.4 5. which say stand by thy self come not neere me for I am holier then thou and often he taxeth them for counting themselves Saints righteous holy c. and judging the King and his party otherwise whereas in the mean time in 8 or 9. pages together he hath little else but calling the Army dogs and devils and himself a Saint they in Satan darknesse hel he in God light heaven they all fear himself all faith they deceivers hypocrites lyars but he righteous sincere true speake out Reader hast thou ever seen more palpable grosnesse 2. Jn pag. 34. he expresseth himself thus if you find any world in me you shall doe me right to afflict it break it let it suffer c. T is the best thing J find in all his book and it gives me the more encouragement to speak to him of his error and fayling and the greater hope I have of his amendment now if the tree may be known by the fruit and the speech shewes what he is within as a stincking breath argues rotten lungs and filthy inwards then without doubt this followes to wit that there is a great deale of world in you many sinfull lusts and vile affections which need afflicting and breaking look upon these words they are your owne page 36. and specially applyed to his Excellency and the Generall Counsell of War You are cast out and gone out and live out the blessed and glorous presence of God and so are Dogs rated by God into a filthy kennel of base things and are as fearful as dogs I do not set this down as if in other places there were not the like words but to lay it before you as a glasse that you may see there is world in you and what an unruly tongue you have to powre out evil things If any man seem religious and bridleth not his tongue but deceiveth his own heart that mans religion is vain Likewise your boasting and glorying it is a thing altogether unbeseeming a Child of God The Saints have scorn'd and loathed it 't is no song of Zion Paradise excludes it in the new Jerusalem are no self-praisers but all praysers of God 't is the spirit of Antichrist to say I am none else besides me the dialect and tongue of a Pharisie and hypocrite to say I am not as other men But specially I must tell you of a world and wickedness in you I say not a word of wickedness which is your idle fancies and dreams Lord what a deal of froth and foolery is there forth in the world under the name of William Sedgwick and that late Non-sense The Spiritual madman shews how more more Satan beguiles you and carries you on with stronger delusions Now the good God for his Christs sake heal your errour and restore you to sobriety truth and the spirit of meekness Having ended with his Answer to the Armies exceptions against the Treaty next he leads it unto two Objections mentioned in the Remonstrance 1. Their former declaring for the King and compliance with Him And here he repeates some of their words 1. Partly necessitating us for the present prevention of that mischief to the publick they were running into in that kind as we apprehended 2. That moderation was but hypocritical 3. We aim'd not at the strengthening our selves to the ruin of any person but to prevent c. And afterwards you repeat and say 'T was error unbelief and carnal counsels To let passe how he saies There 's no kind of men can be such compleat and neat knaves as a Jesuit a Pharisie an old well-studied-Professor of religion And also his bold speech That he knows their waies and hearts His answer contains a threatning to shame them for iniquity of holy things and to shew the abomination of their Reformation 1. He saith It was not their sin to carry out principles of goodness and tenderness to all I answer It was Jehoshaphat's failing and the Lord blames him for it saying Should'st thou help the ungodly Which shews that aid and assistance yeelded to some may be unwarrantable as the case stands 2. For his saying In your turning now you turn not to God The answer is If God justifie who can condemn His heaping up reproachful words proves nothing only argues an il govern'd tongue 3. Is the fight of sin and godly sorrow for it a miserable and dark principle and a very wicked practice We know better The Apostle saith If we say we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us And therefore in the Remonstrance they speak as Saints and true Christians when they say Wee find matter of acknowledgement before the Lord concerning our error frailty unbeleef For indeed the dayes of faith are as the dayes of the year some fair sometimes foule one while a sunshine summer another while a long and tedious winter A Christian soul between faith and fear is like a piece of Iron between two Loadstones the one drawing one way the other drawing another way Gal. 5.17 As a valiant man may startle
them after the fathers death should he be a fool a knave a madman a tyrant either such a thing was never meant or if it were ever so such people therein shewed themselves either to be fools knaves madmen or children as doing a thing against all reason all right the manifest law of God and very light of nature And this we further add That whatsoever covenants or contracts have been between former Kings and our Ancestors about succession and what acts of Parliament laws statutes they have made about it they are no way binding to us neither are we thereto related or concern'd in the same If two men make a contract together that the son of the one shall marry the others daughter if these children be under age they have liberty and power especially their fathers being dead to do as they think good being come to age neither doth that pre-contract binde them but they are still free and may dispose of themselves as they see good that is they have liberty and power to marry any other if they see it more convenient and necessary So I confidently affirm whatsoerer Crown Contract hath been made by our forefathers in our non-age pitch where you will touching this succession we have our liberty to take or refuse and are in point of conscience no more bound to crown the heir of William the Conquerer Henry the Eight James the Sixt of Scotland or this King Charles than any other man but if we will to be like other nations still have a King such then is our liberty and freedome now that we may yea and ought to elect and crown such a one whom we shall find to be best qualified and fittest for us Now we come to the next general Head That Kings are and ought to be bound by Lawes and are not to be exempted from them I shall not at this time shew the flattery and vanity of some Sycophants and Parasites who affirm that people may not prescribe any law to their Prince that Kings are above law Now touching that senselesse distinction of Bodin and others who hold that the Supream Magistrate howsoever bound to the laws of God of Nature and Nations yet are free from all Civil laws prescribed by themselves nor that Court destinction between Law directive and coactive what Kings should doe and what Kings may do This I say with Pareus Superior Magistratus est subjectus legibus divinis suae republicae The supream Magistrate is subject to Gods laws and to the lawes of his own Common-wealth Comment in Rom. C. 13. dub 6. yea more strictly obliged to observe his own lawes than subjects and departing from the law becomes a Tyrant and therefore the whole kingdom which is above the King may not only bind him by laws but question him and punish him for the breach of them And this is a most certain truth howsoever by some slavish pens opposed that all Kings are so far bound to the laws and customs of their kingdoms that if they violate and alter them at their pleasure they may truly be called Tyrants according to Aristotle and herein absolve their people from their aleagence which they have made unto them Take for instance the united Netherland Provences who for this very cause did declare Philip King of Spain to have fallen and cut himselfe off from the Seignorie of the Netherlands and caused a new form of an oath to be drawn in manner of an abjuration of the King of Spain every one swearing duty and obedience unto the Estates by the publick officers and magistrates of every town and province the which thing was and still is by all Protestants and reformed Churches justified and approved lawful I could here set down many such examples of other Nations who by their lawes required their Kings to be subject to their lawes aswell as any other yea all nations except where tyrants have reigned have alwaies had some lawe to restrain their kings from excesses and abusive courses Besides all good Emperours and Kings in all ages have professed and practised the same Trajan acknowledged that the Prince was not above law and giving the Sword to any Praetor or Cōmander he would say Hoc gladio contra me utitur si in rempublicam peccavero The like said Theodosius and Valentinian Emperours Digna est vox Majestate regnantis in legibus alligatum se Principem profiteri lib. 4. cap. d. leg. prin So Antiochus the Third King of Asia is commended that he writ to all the Cities of his kingdom If there should be any thing in his letters which should seem contrary to the Laws they should not obey them These men knew it is God only that may do in heaven and in earth what he pleaseth as for man whether Emperour or King he is under law and therefore must do nothing but what is lawfull just and right And for more authentick proofe we could produce the Kings of Israel and Judah who had no arbitrary power to do what they pleased nor exempted from laws but inferiour too and obliged by them as well as subjects this is evident by sundry impregnable texts Deut. 17.18 19. Josh. 1.1.8 1 Sam. 8.11 to 19. and 12. 14 15.20 c. Ezek. 46.18 The Jewish Doctors from these words I will visit their transgression with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of men 2 Sam. 7. write that it was a custom in Israel If their Kings transgressed against the law of the King they were to be scourged for it But the question is not so much whether Kings are under law for this now begins now to be generally granted but the question is If Kings do break law what 's their punishment and who shal do it The answer to this belongs properly to the next point yet something I shall say to it in this place For my part I have not yet seen in any mans writing new or old though never so great a Kings-man any cleer and convincing reason that seeing Kings are subject to laws both the law of God and of men wherfore they should have any immunity or be priviledged from punishment appointed by law to such and such offences more than other men Plainly thus If King or Prince be a Murderer a Traytor a Pirate an Adulterer perjured c. why the punishment due to other murderers traytors c. and for the like crimes inflicted upon them should not be executed upon the other King or Prince what the custom hath been or what partial laws foolish ignorant men have made I count as nothing let reason justice Divine precepts be considered Hence let us take light and information First as for the law of God it goes generally and takes all in quisquis siquis quicunque whosoever if any man what mansoever if a murderer an adulterer c. let him die the death Kings and Princes are not here exempted And Secondly In the point of Justice 't is
c. from the people any further due unto them I know no faster bond or knot between any two parties then man and wife the relation between Kings and subjects I am sure is not neerer neverthelesse all grant adulterium etiam vinculum ipsum matrimonii solvit adultery in either person breaks even that very bond and knot of marriage why therefore a subject breaking his covenant with the King in being a traitor should be punished for it and the King breaking his covenant with the people in proving a tyrant or traitor to the people should not be punished likewise I am sure there is no man living able to give a just reason for it Reas. 4. If men by Law may be punished yea and great punishment is inflicted upon them who are onely as instruments used by Princes to accomplish their wicked designes and meerely act to please them surely it is against justice reason and all conscience that the first mover and grand author should escape unpunished Gods example teacheth otherwise who in all ages hath punished the author of sinne more severely and extreamly then the instrument we see many times the adulterous mother punished for her whoredome yet the bastard spared but that the bastard should suffer and the mother escape it is an example unheard of Reas. 5. Howsoever men may remit the wrong or injury as it it in reference to themselves and their own interest neverthelesse as the transgression respecteth Gods Law and so far as God cals for judgment and punishment it is not in their power to spare or pardon though they may doe with their own what they will yet what is the Lords they may not alter mitigate qualifie c. but they ought to proceed according to the directions and rules which he hath prescribed to them I say without addition or dimunition strictly punctually and precisely I shall end this point with the words of Bodin I am of opinion saith he that no Soveraign Prince neither yet any man alive can pardon the punishment due unto the offence which is by the Law of God death no more then he can dispense with the Law of God whereunto he is himself subject And if it be so that the Magistrate deserve capitall punishment which despenseth with the Law of his King how shall it be lawfull for a Soveraign Prince to dispense with his subjects from the Law of God And further if the Prince himself cannot give away the least civil interest of his subjects or pardon the wrong don to another man how can he pardon the wrong don unto ALMIGHTY GOD or murder wilfully committed which by the Law is death for all the pardon he can give vide lib. 1. de Reip. cap. 10. Secondly As for Lawyers law it is just like Mr. William Prin it speaks every thing and any thing and nothing Thus their law and he are like the Dutch mans hose you may wear them how you will put them up or down for they are made to serve both wayes but for that whirligig and busie body I do but mention him by the way for there is an Independant piece comming forth to shew his lightnesse contradiction extreme pride and malice What punishment by law is due unto a Traytor it is so obvious and well known as to cite Statutes for it would be but as a vain repetition Now the Law cleerly resolves 28. Hen. 8. C. 7 That if the King become an open enemy to the kingdom and subjects to wast or ruin them or shall seek to betray them to a forraign nation he becomes a traytor to the realm and hereupon doth forfeit his very title to the Crown Bracton saith the King is the highest Justiticiar in the kingdom Licet in justitia recipienda minimo de regno suo comparitur but as low as any in receiving justice lib. 3. cap. 9. fol. 167. c. This indeed is law for what is law {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} according to the strict Etimologie a proper signification but an equal distributing to every one his own whether it be reward or punishment and therefore whensoever any thing hath been enacted to priviledge kings and princes from personal punishment in case they transgressed against God and men and should prove Tyrants Traytors Murderers Pirates Witches and what not I do avouch it was no law to speak truly and properly it was not {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} but {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as contrary to the law of God and nature as light is to darknesse and these were right Antinomians as opposing and denying law to establish their own wicked and lawlesse decree Law is ratio naturalis natural reason but it is no principle in nature to punish the lesser theft murder treason tyranny c. and spare the greater theeves murderers c. to execute the bastard and quit the mother as we said before Again 'T is without dispute when Princes prove Tyrants their deposition is justificable by law Now to know a Tyrant King James describes him thus A King governing in a setled kingdom ceaseth to he a King and degenerates into a Tyrant so soon as hee leaves to rule by his own laws If this be true as it is most true then it is the highest degree of Tyranny condemned and abhorred by God and all good men when the King begins to invade his subjects persons rights liberties c. to set up an arbitrary power imposeth unlawful taxes raises forces plunders wasteth and spoils his kingdom imprisons kills and banisheth his most faithful best people in an hostile and wrathful manner whom he ought to protect and rule in peace and whether this King have not thus done even our enemies themselves being judges There is one thing remarkable in the aforesaid speech where he saies He ceaseth to be a King Hence I gather that a King degenerating into a Tyrant hath no benefit nor any thing to help himself in point of law by any Statute containing an immunity or exemption of the Kings person from punishment as death it self for whatsoever is provided in such a case it is only in reference to a King but when he ceaseth to be a King he loseth the benefit of all such acts of Parliament neither is there any Statute broken if he personally suffer for his crimes Thirdly For Scripture proof or presidents Zuinglius positively affirms that the Israelites might not only resist but also depose their kings for wickednes idolatrie yea that al the people were justly punished by the Lord because they removed not their wicked Kings out of their places and brings sundry instances for it Explinat Aut. 42. That God did punish the people for their kings enormities t is evident by Jer. 15.1 2 3 4. 2 King 21.11 12. Chap. 23.26 24.3 and the history of the Kings and Chronicles in sundry other places clearly shew so much the which thing surely God in justice would not