Terms Honour thy Mother as if all Power were Originally in the Mother I appeal whether the Argument be not as good on one side as the other Father and Mother being joyned all along in the Old and New Testament where Honour or Obedience is injoyn'd Children again our A tell us O. 254. that this command Honour thy Father gives the right to govern and makes the Form of Government Monarchical To which I answer that if by Honour thy Father be meant Obedience to the Political Power of the Magistrate it concerns not any duty we owe to our Natural Fathers who are Subjects because they by our A s Doctrin are divested of all that Power it being placed wholly in the Prince and so being equally Subjects and Slaves with their Children can have no right by that Title to any such Honour or Obedience as contains in it Political Subjection If Honour thy Father and Mother signifies the duty we owe our Natural Parents as by our Saviours Interpretation Math. 15. 4. and all the other mention'd places 't is plain it does then it cannot concern Political Obedience but a duty that is owing to Persons who have no Title to Sovereignty nor any Political Authority as Magistrates over Subjects for the Person of a private Father and a Title to Obedience due to the Supream Magistrate are things inconsistent and therefore this command which must necessarily comprehend the Persons of our Natural Fathers must mean a duty we owe them distinct from our Obedience to the Magistrate and from which the most Absolute Power of Princes cannot absolve us what this duty is we shall in its due place examin 67. And thus we have at last got through all that in our A looks like an Argument for that Absolute unlimited Sovereginty described Sect. 8. which he supposes in Adam so that Mankind ever since have all been born slaves without any Title to Freedom But if Creation which gave nothing but a Being made not Adam Prince of his Posterity If Adam Gen. 1. 28. was not constituted Lord of Mankind nor had a Private Dominion given him exclusive of his Children but only a Right and Power over the Earth and inferiour Creatures in common with the Children of Men If also Gen. 3. 16. God gave not any Political Power to Adam over his Wife and Children but only Subjected Eve to Adam as a punishment or foretold the Subjection of the weaker Sex in the ordering the common concernments of their Families but gave not thereby to Adam as to the Husband Power of Life and Death which necessarily belongs to the Magistrate if Fathers by begetting their Children acquire no such Power over them and if the command Honour thy Father and Mother give it not but only enjoyns a duty owing to Parents equally whether Subjects or not and to the Mother as well as the Father If all this be so as I think by what has been said is very evident then Man hás a Natural Freedom notwithstanding all our A confidently says to the contrary since all that share in the same common Nature Faculties and Powers are in Nature equal and ought to partake in the same common Rights and Priviledges till the manifest appointment of God who is Lord over all Blessed for ever can be produced to shew any Particular Persons Supremacy or a Man 's own Consent Subjects him to a Superior This is so plain that our A confesses that Sr. Iohn Heyward Blacwood and Barclay the great vindicators of the Right of Kings could not deny it but admit with one consent the Natural Liberty and Equality of Mankind for a Truth unquestionable And our A hath been so far from producing any thing that may make good his great Position that Adam was Absolute Monarch and so Men are not Naturally free that even his own Proofs make against him so that to use is own way of Arguing This first erroneous Principle failing the whole Fabrick of this vast engine of Absolute Power and Tyranny drops down of it self and there needs no more to be said in answer to all that he builds upon so false and frail a Foundation 68. But to save others the pains were there any need he is not sparing himself to shew by his own contradictions the weakness of his own Doctrins Adams Absolute and Sole Dominion is that which he is every where full of and all along builds on and yet he tells us p. 12. that as Adam was Lord of his Children so his Children under him had a Command and Power over their own Children The unlimited and undivided Sovereginty of Adams Fatherhood by our A s computation stood but a little while only during the first Generation but as soon as he had Grand-Children Sr. Rob. could give but a very ill account of it Adam as Father of hiâ— Children saith he hath an Absolute Unlimited Royal Power over thâ—m and by vertue thereof over those that they begot and so to all Generations and yet his Children viz. Cain and Seth have a Paternal Power over their Children at the same time so that they are at the same time Absolute Lords and yet Subjects and Slaves Adam has all the Authority as Grand-Father of his People and they have a part as Fathers He is Absolute over them and their Posterity by having begotten them and yet they are Absolute over their Children by the same Title no says our A Adams Children under him had Power over their own Children but still with Subordination to the the first Parent A good distinction that sounds well and 't is pitty it signifies nothing nor can be reconciled with our A s Words I readily grant that supposing Adams Absolute Power over his Posterity any of his Children might have from him a delegated and so a Subordinate Power over a part or all the rest But that cannot be the Power our A speaks of here it is not a Power by Grant and Commission but the Natural Paternal Power he supposes a Father to have over his Children for 1 o he says as Adam was Lord of his Children so his Children under him had a Power over their own Children They were then Lords over their own Children after the same manner and by the same Title that Adam was i. e. by right of Generation by right of Fatherhood 2 o 't is plain he means the Natural Power of Fathers because he limits it to be only over their own Children a delegated Power has no such limitation as only over their own Children it might be over others as well as their own Children 3 o If it were a delegated Power it must appear in Scripture but there is no ground in Scripture to affirm that Adam's Children had any other Power over theirs then what they naturally had as Fathers 69. But that he means here Paternal Power and no other is past doubt from the Inference he makes in those words immediately following I see not then how the Children of Adam or
and if any thing could be demanded from him by either of the other it could be only due to his natural Father who perhaps might have forfeited his Right to much of that Duty comprehended in the command Honour your Parents but could transfer none of it to another he that purchased and neglected the Child got by his Purchase and Grant of the Father no Title to Duty or Honour from the Child but only he acquired it who by his own Authority performing the Office and Care of a Father to the Forlorn and Perishing Infant made himself by Paternal Care a Title to proportionable Degrees of Paternal Power This will be more easily admitted upon consideration of the nature of Paternal Power for which I refer my Reader to the 2 d Book 101. To return to the Argument in hand this is evident That Paternal Power arising only from Begetting for in that our A places it alone can neither be transfer'd nor inherited And he that does not beget can no more have Paternal Power which arises from thence then he can have a Right to any thing who performs not the condition to which only it is annexed If one should ask by what Law has a Father Power over his Children it will be answered no doubt by the Law of nature which gives such a Power over them to him that begets them If one should ask likewise by what Law does our A s Heir come by a Right to Inherit I think it would be answer'd by the Law of nature too for I find not that our A brings one word of Scripture to prove the Right of such an Heir he speaks of why then the Law of nature gives Fathers Paternal Power over their Children because they did beget them and the same Law of nature gives the same Paternal Power to the Heir over his Brethren who did not beget them whence it follows that either the Father has not his Paternal Power by begetting or else that the Heir has it not at all For 't is hard to understand how the Law of nature which is the Law of reason can give the Paternal Power to the Father over his Children for the only reason of Begetting and to the first born over his Brethren without this only reason i. e. for no reason at all and if the Eldest by the Law of nature can inherit thiâ— Paternal Power without the only reason that gives a Title to it so may the Youngest as well as he and a stranger as well as either for where there is no reason for any one as there is not but for him that begets all have an equal Title am sure our A offers no reason and when any body does we shall see whether it will hold or no. 102. In the mean time 't is as good Sense to say that by the Law of nature a Man has Right to inherit the Property of another because he is of Kin to him and is known to be of his Blood and therefore by the same Law of nature an utter Stranger to his Blood has Right to inherit his Estate As to say that by the Law of nature he that begets them has Pâ—ternal Power over his Children and therefore by the Law of nature the Hâ—â—r that begets them not has this Paternal Power over them or supposing the Law of the Land gave Absolute Power over their Children to such only who nursed them and fed their Children themselves could any body pretend that this Law gave any one who did no such thing Absolute Power over those who were not his Children 103. When therefore it can be shew'd that conjugal Power can belong to him that is not an Husband it will also I believe be proved that our A s Paternal Power acquired by begetting may be inherited by a Son and that a Brother as Heir to his Fathers Power may have Paternal Power over his Brethren and by the same Rule conjugal Power to but till then I think we may rest satisfied that the Paternal Power of Adam this Sovereign Authority of Fatherhood were there any such could not descend to nor be inherited by his next Heir Fatherly Power I easily grant our A if it will do him any good can never be lost because it will be as long in the World as there are Fathers but none of them will have Adams Paternal Power or derive theirs from him but every one will have his own by the same Title Adam had his viz. by Begetting but not by Inheritance or Succession no more then Husbands have their conjugal Power by Inheritance from Adam And thus we see as Adam had no such Property no such Paternal Power as gave him Sovereign Jurisdiction over Mankind so likewise his Sovereignty built upon either of these Titles if he had any such could not have descended to his Heir but must have ended with him Adam therefore as has been proved being neither Monarch nor his imaginary Monarchy hereditable the Power which is now in the World is not that which was Adams since all that Adam could have upon our A s grounds either of Property or Fatherhood necessarily dyed with him and could not be convey'd to Posterity by Inheritance In the next place we will consider whether Adam had any such Heir to inherit his Power as our A talks of CHAP. X. Of the Heir to Monarchical Power of Adam 104. OUR A tells us O. 253. That it is a truth undeniable that there cannot be any multitude of Men whatsoever either great or small though gathered together from the several corners and remotest Regions of the World but that in the same Multitude considered by its self there is one Man amongst them that in nature hath a Right to be King of all the rest as being the next Heir to Adam and all the other Subject to him every Man by nature is a King or a Subject and again p. 20. If Adam himself were still living and now ready to dye it is certain that there is one Man and but one in the World who is next Heir let this Multitude of Men be if our A pleases all the Princes upon the Earth there will then be by our A s Rule one amongst them that in nature hath a Right to be King of all the rest as being the right Heir to Adam An excellent way to Establish the Titles of Princes and settle the Obedience of their Subjects by setting up an Hundred or perhaps a Thousand Titles if there be so many Princes in the World against any King now Reigning upon our A s grounds as good as his own If this Right of Heir carry any weight with it if it be the Ordinance of God as our A seems to tell us O. 244. must not all be Subject to it from the highest to the lowest can those who wear the name of Princes without having the Right of being Heirs to Adam demand Obedience from their Subjects by this Title and not be bound to pay it by
we see the Positive Law of God every where joins them together without distinction when it commands the Obedience of Children Honour thy Father and thy Mother Exod. 20. 12. Whosoever curseth his Father or his Mother Lev. 20. 9. Ye shall fear every Man his Mother and his Father Lev. 19. 3. Children obey your Parents c. Eph. 6. 1. is the stile of the Old and New Testament 53. Had but this one thing been well consider'd without looking any deeper into the matter it might perhaps have kept men from running into those gross mistakes they have made about this Power of Parents which however it might without any great harshness bear the name of Absolute Dominion and Regal Authority when under the title of Paternal Power it seem'd appropriated to the Father would yet have sounded but odly and in the very name shewn the absurdity if this supposed Absolute Power over Children had been called Parental and thereby discover'd that it belong'd to the Mother too For it will but very ill serve the turn of those Men who contend so much for the Absolute Power and Authority of the Fatherhood as they call it that the Mother should have any share in it And it would have but ill supported the Monarchy they contend for when by the very name it appeared that that Fundamental Authority from whence they would derive their Government of a single Person only was not plac'd in one but two Persons jointly But to let this of names pass 54. Though I have said above 2. That all Men by Nature are equal I cannot be supposed to understand all sorts of Equality Age or Virtue may give Men a just Precedency Excellency of Parts and Merit may place others above the Common Level Birth may subject some and Alliance or Benefits others to pay an Observance to those to whom Nature Gratitude or other Respects may have made it due and yet all this consists with the Equality which all Men are in in respect of Jurisdiction or Dominion one over another which was the Equality I there spoke of as proper to the Business in hand being that equal Right that every Man hath to his Natural Freedom without being subjected to the Will or Authority of any other Man 55. Children I confess are not born in this full state of Equality though they are born to it Their Parents have a sort of Rule and Jurisdiction over them when they come into the World and for some time after but 't is but a temporary one The Bonds of this Subjection are like the Swadling Cloths they are wrapt up in and supported by in the weakness of their Infancy Age and Reason as they grow up loosen them till atlength they drop quite off and leave a Man at his own free Disposal 56. Adam was created a perfect Man his Body and Mind in full possession of their Strength and Reason and so was capable from the first Instance of his being to provide for his own Support and Preservation and govern his Actions according to the Dictates of the Law of Reason God had implanted in him From him the World is peopled with his Descendants who are all born Infants weak and helpless without Knowledge or Understanding But to supply the Defects of this imperfect State till the improvement of Growth and Age had removed them Adam and Eve and after them all Parents were by the Law of Nature under an Obligation to preserve nourish and educate the Children they had begotten not as their own Workmanship but the Workmanship of their own Maker the Almighty to whom they were to be accountable for them 57. The Law that was to govern Adam was the same that was to govern all his Posterity the Law of Reason But his Off-spring having another way of entrance into the World different from him by a natural Birth that produced them ignorant and without the Use of Reason they were not presently under that Law For no Body can be under a Law that is not promulgated to him and this Law being promulgated or made known by Reason only he that is not come to the Use of his Reason cannot be said to be under this Law and Adam's Children being not presently as soon as born under this Law of Reason were not presently free For Law in its true Notion is not so much the Limitation as the direction of a free and intelligent Agent to his proper Interest and prescribes no farther than is for the general Good of those under that Law Could they be happier without it the Law as an useless thing would of it self vanish and that ill deserves the Name of Confinement which hedges us in only from Bogs and Precipices So that however it may be mistaken the end of Law is not to abolish or restrain but to preserve and enlarge Freedom For in all the states of created Beings capable of Laws where there is no Law there is no Freedom For Liberty is to be free from Restraint and Violence from others which cannot be where there is no Law and is not as we are told A Liberty for every Man to do what he lists For who could be free when every other Man's Humour might domineer over him But a Liberty to dispose and order freely as he lists his Person Actions Possessions and his whole Property within the Allowance of those Laws under which he is and therein not to be subject to the the arbitrary Will of another but freely follow his own 58. The Power then that Parents have over their Children arises from that Duty which is incumbent on them to take care of their Off-spring during the imperfect state of Childhood To inform the Mind and govern the Actions of their yet ignorant Nonage till Reason shall take its place and ease them of that Trouble is what the Children want and the Parents are bound to For God haing given Man an Understanding to direct his Actions has allowed him a freedom of Will and liberty of Acting as properly belonging thereunto within the bounds of that Law he is under But whilst he is in an Estate wherein he has no Understanding of his own to direct his Will he is not to have any Will of his own to follow He that understands for him must will for him too he must prescribe to his Will and regulate his Actions but when he comes to the estate that made his Father a Free-man the Son is a Free-man too 59. This holds in all the Laws a Man is under whether natural or civil Is a man under the Law of Nature what made him free of that Law what gave him a free disposing of his Property according to his own Will within the compass of that Law I answer an Estate wherein he might be suppos'd capable to know that Law that so he might keep his Actions within the Bounds of it When he has acquired that state he is presumed to know how far that Law is to be his Guide
share with the Father 65. Nay this power so little belongs to the Father by any peculiar right of Nature but only as he is Guardian of his Children that when he quits his Care of them he loses his power over them which goes along with their Nourishment and Education to which it is inseparably annexed and belongs as much to the Foster-Father of an exposed Child as to the Natural Father of another So little power does the bare act of begetting give a Man over his Issue if all his Care ends there and this be all the Title he hath to the Name and Authority of a Father and what will become of this Paternal Power in that part of the World where one Woman hath more than one Husband at a time Or in those parts of America where when the Husband and Wife part which happens frequently the Children are all left to the Mother follow her and are wholly under her Care and Provision And if the Father die whilst the Children are young do they not naturally every where owe the same Obedience to their Mother during their Minority as to their Father were he alive And will any one say that the Mother hath a legislative Power over her Children that she can make standing Rules which shall be of perpetual Obligation by which they ought to regulate all the Concerns of their Property and bound their Liberty all the course of their Lives and inforce the observation of them with Capital Punishments For this is the proper power of the Magistrate of which the Father hath not so much as the shadow His Command over his Children is but temporary and reaches not their Life or Property It is but a help to the weakness and imperfection of their Non-age a Discipline necessary to their Education and though a Father may dispose of his own Possessions as he pleases when his Children are out of danger of perishing for want yet his power extends not to the lives or goods which either their own industry or anothers bounty has made theirs nor to their liberty neither when they are once arrived to the infranchisement of the years of discretion The Father's Empire then ceases and he can from thence forwards no more dispose of the liberty of his Son than that of any other Man And it must be far from an absolute or perpetual Jurisdiction from which a Man may withdraw himself having Licence from Divine Authority to leave Father and Mother and cleave to his Wife 66. But though there be a time when a Child comes to be as free from subjection to the will and Command of his Father as he himself is free from subjection to the will of any body else and they are both under no other restraint but that which is common to them both whether it be the Law of Nature or municipal Law of their Country yet this freedom exempts not a Son from that honour which he ought by the Law of God and Nature to pay his Parents God having made the Parents Instruments in his great design of continuing the Race of Mankind and the occasions of Life to their Children as he hath laid on them an obligation to nourish preserve and bring up their Off-spring so he has laid on the Children a perpetual obligation of honouring their Parents which containing in it an inward esteem and reverence to be shewn by all outward expressions ties up the Child from any thing that may ever injure or affront disturb or endanger the happiness or life of those from whom he received his and engages him in all actions of defence relief assistance and comfort of those by whose means he entred into being and has been made capable of any enjoyments of life From this obligation no State no freedom can absolve Children But this is very far from giving Parents a power of command over their Children or an Authority to make Laws and dispose as they please of their Lives or Liberties 'T is one thing to owe honour respect gratitude and assistance another to require an absolute obedience and submission The honour due to Parents a Monarch in his Throne owes his Mother and yet this lessens not his Authority nor subjects him to her Government 67. The subjection of a minor places in the Father a temporary Government which terminates with the minority of the Child And the honour due from a Child places in the Parents a perpetual right to respect reverence support and compliance to more or less as the Father's care cost and kindness in his Education has been more or less And this ends not with minority but holds in all parts and conditions of a Man's Life The want of distinguishing these two powers which the Father hath in the right of tuition during minority and the right of honour all his Life may perhaps have caused a great part of the mistakes about this matter For to speak properly of them the first of these is rather the priviledge of Children and duty of Parents than any Prerogative of Paternal Power The nourishment and Education of their Children is a Charge so incumbent on Parents for their Childrens good that nothing can absolve them from taking care of it And though the power of commanding and chastising them go along with it yet God hath woven into the principles of humane nature such a tenderness for their Off-spring that there is little fear that Parents should use their power with too much rigour the excess is seldom on the severe side the strong biass of nature drawing the other way And therefore God Almighty when he would express his gentle dealing with the Israelites he tells them that though he chasten'd them he chasten'd them as a man chastens his Son Deut. 8. 5. i. e. with tenderness and affection and kept them under no severer discipline than what was absolutely best for them and had been less kindness to have slacken'd This is that power to which Children are commanded obedience that the pains and care of their Parents may not be increased or ill rewarded 68. On the other side honour and support all that which gratitude requires to return for the benefits received by and from them is the indispensible duty of the Child and the proper priviledge of the Parents This is intended for the Parents advantage as the other is for the Childs though Education the Parents duty seems to have most power because the ignorance and infirmities of Childhood stand in need of restraint and correction which is a visible exercise of Rule and a kind of Dominion And that duty which is comprehended in the word honour requires less obedience though the obligation be stronger on grown than younger Children For who can think the Command Children obey your Parents requires in a Man that has Children of his own the same submission to his Father as it does in his yet young Children to him and that by this Precept he were bound to obey all his Father's Commands
if out of a conceit of authority he should have the indiscretion to treat him still as a Boy 69. The first part then of Paternal Power or rather Duty which is Education belongs so to the Father that it terminates at a certain season when the business of Education is over it ceases of it self and is also alienable before For a Man may put the tuition of his Son in other hands and he that has made his Son an Apprentice to another has discharged him during that time of a great part of his Obedience both to himself and to his Mother But all the duty of honour the other part remains never the less entire to them nothing can cancel that It is so inseparable from them both that the Father's Authority cannot dispossess the Mother of this right nor can any Man discharge his Son from honouring her that bore him But both these are very far from a power to make Laws and inforceing them with Penalties that may reach Estate Liberty Limbs and Life The power of Commanding ends with Non-age and though after that honour and respect support and defence and whatsoever gratitude can oblige a Man to for the highest benefits he is naturally capable of be always due from a Son to his Parents yet all this puts no Scepter into the Father's hand no Soveraign Power of Commanding He has no Dominion over his Sons property or actions nor any right that his Will should prescribe to his Sons in all things however it may become his Son in many things not very inconvenient to him and his Family to pay a Deference to it 70. A Man may owe honour and respect to an ancient or wise Man defence to his Child or Friend relief and support to the distressed and gratitude to a Benefactor to such a degree that all he has all he can do cannot sufficiently pay it But all these give no Authority no right of making Laws to any one over him from whom they are owing And 't is plain all this is due not to the bare title of Father not only because as has been said it is owing to the Mother too but because these obligations to Parents and the degrees of what is required of Children may be varied by the different care and kindness trouble and expence is often imployed upon one Child more than another 71. This shews the reason how it comes to pass that Parents in Societies where they themselves are Subjects retain a power over their Children and have as much right to their Subjection as those who are in the state of Nature which could not possibly be if all political Power were only paternal and that in truth they were one and the same thing for then all paternal Power being in the Prince the Subject could naturally have none of it but these two Powers political and paternal are so perfectly distinct and separate and built upon so different Foundations and given to so different Ends that every Subject that is a Father has as much a paternal Power over his Children as the Prince has over his And every Prince that has Parents owes them as much filial Duty and Obedience as the meanest of his Subjects do to theirs and can therefore contain not any part or degree of that kind of Dominion which a Prince or Magistrate has over his Subject 72. Though the Obligation on the Parents to bring up their Children and the Obligation on Children to honour their Parents contain all the Power on the one hand and Submission on the other which are proper to this Relation yet there is another Power ordinarily in the Father whereby he has a tye on the Obedience of his Children which though it be common to him with other men yet the Occasions of shewing it almost constantly happening to Fathers in their private Families and in Instances of it else-where being rare and less taken notice of it passes in the World for a part of paternal Iurisdiction And this is the Power Men generally have to bestow their Estates on those who please them best The Possession of the Father being the Expectation and Inheritance of the Children ordinarily in certain proportions according to the Law and Custom of each Country yet it is commonly in the Father's Power to bestow it with a more sparing or liberal hand according as the Behaviour of this or that Child hath comported with his Will and Humour 73. This is no small Tye to the Obedience of Children and there being always annexed to the Enjoyment of Land a Submission to the Government of the Country of which that Land is a part It has been commonly suppos'd That a Father could oblige his Posterity to that Government of which he himself was a Subject that his Compact held them whereas it being only a necessary Condition annex'd to the Land which is under that Government reaches only those who will take it on that Condition and so is no natural Tye or Engagement but a voluntary Submission For every Man's Children being by Nature as free as himself or any of his Ancestours ever were may whilst they are in that Freedom choose what Society they will join themselves to what Commonwealth they will put themselves under But if they will enjoy the Inheritance of their Ancestours they must take it on the same terms their Ancestours had it and submit to all the Conditions annex'd to such a Possession By this Power indeed Fathers oblige their Children to Obedience to themselves even when they are past Minority and most commonly too subject them to this or that political Power But neither of these by any peculiar right of Father-hood but by the Reward they have in their hands to inforce and recompence such a Compliance and is no more Power than what a French-man has over an English-man who by the hopes of an Estate he will leave him will certainly have a strong tye on his Obedience and if when it is left him he will enjoy it he must certainly take it upon the Conditions annex'd to the Possession of Land in that Country where it lies whether it be France or England 74. To conclude then though the Father's Power of commanding extends no farther than the Minority of his Children and to a degree only fit for the Discipline and Government of that Age. And though that Honour and Respect and all that which the Latins called Piety which they indispensibly owe to their Parents all their Life times and in all estates with all that Support and Defence is due to them gives the Father no Power of governing i. e. making Laws and exacting Penalties on his Children Though by this he has no Dominion over the Property or Actions of his Son yet 't is obvious to conceive how easie it was in the first Ages of the World and in places still where the thinness of People gives Families leave to separate into unpossessed Quarters and they have room to remove and plant themselves
the express words convey it and by which only it is held and thus if as our A himself contends that Donation Gen. 1. 28. were made only to Adam personally his Heir could not succeed to his Property in the Creatures and if it were a Donation to any but Adam let it be shewn that it was to his Heir in our A s Sense i.e. to one of his Children exclusive of all the rest 86. But not to follow our A too far out of the way the plain of the Case is this God having made Man and Planted in him as in all other Animals a strong desire of self Preservation and furnished the World with things fit for Food and Rayment and other necessaries of Life Subservient to his design that Man should live and abide for some time upon the the Face of the Earth and not that so curious and wonderful a piece of Workmanship by its own negligence or want of necessaries should perish again presently after a few moments continuance God I say having made Man and the World thus spoke to him that is directed him by his Senses and Reason as he did the inferior Animals by their Sense and Instinct which he had placed in them to that purpose to the use of those things which were serviceable for his subsistence and gave him the means of his Preservation and therefore I doubt not but before these words were pronounced 1 Gen. 28. 29. If they must be understood Litterally to have been spoken or without any such Verbal Donation Man had a right to a Use of the Creatures by the Will and Grant of God for the desire strong desire of Preserving his Life and Being having been Planted in him as a Principle of Action by God himself Reason which was the voice of God in him could not but teach him and assure him that pursuing that natural Inclination he had to preserve his Being he followed the Will of his Maker and therefore had a right to make use of those Creatures which by his Reason or Senses he could discover would be serviceable thereunto and thus Mans Property in the Creatures was founded upon the right he had to make use of those things that were necessary or useful to his being 87. This being the Reason and Foundation of Adams Property gave the same Title on the same Ground to all his Children not only after his death but in his life time so that here was no Priviledge of his Heir above his other Children which could exclude them from an equal right to the use of the inferior Creatures for the comfortable Preservation of their Beings Which is all the Property Man hath in them and so Adams Sovereignty built on Property or as our A calls it Private Dominion comes to nothing Every Man had a right to the Creatures by the same Title Adam had viz. by the right every one had to take care of and provide for their Subsistance and thus Men had a right in common Adams Children in common with him But if any one had began and made himself a Property in any particular thing which how he or any one else could do shall be shewn in another place that thing that possession if he dispos'd not otherwise of it by his positive Grant descâ—nded Naturally to his Children and they had a right to succeed to it and possess it 88. It might reasonably be asked here how come Children by this right of possessing before any other the Properties of their Parents upon their Decease for it being Personally the Parents when they dye without actually Transferring their Right to another why does it not return again to the commmon Stock of Mankind 'T will perhaps be answered that common consent hath disposed of it to the Children Common Practice we see indeed does so dispose of it but we cannot say that it is the common consent of Mankind for that hath never been asked nor Actually given and if common tacit Consent had Establish'd it it would make but a positive and not natural Right of Children to Inherit the Goods of their Parents But where the Practice is Universal 't is reasonable to think the Cause is natural The ground then I think to be this The first and strongest desire God Planted in Men and wrought into the very Principle of their nature being that of self Preservation is the Foundation of a right to the Creatures for their particular support and use of each individual Person himself But next to this God Planted in Men a strong desire also of Propagating their Kind and continuing themselves in their posterity and this gives Children a Title to share in the Property of their Parents and a Right to Inherit their Possessions Men are not Proprietors of what they have meerly for themselves their Children have a Title to part of it and have their Kind of Right joyn'd with their Parent 's in the Possession which comes to be wholly theirs when death having put an end to their Parents use of it hath taken them from their Possessions and this we call Inheritance Men being by a like Obligation bound to preserve what they have begotten as to preserve themselves their issue come to have a Right in the Goods they are possessed of And that Children have such a Right is plain from the Laws of God and that Men are convinced that Children have such a Right is Evident from the Law of the Land both which Laws require Parents to provide for their Children 89. For Children being by the course of nature born weak and unable to provide for themselves they have by the appointment of God himself who hath thus ordered the course of nature a right to be nourish'd and maintained by their Parents nay a right not only to a bare Subsistance but to the conveniences and comforts of Life as far as the conditions of their Parents can afford it And hence it comes that when their Parents leave the World and so the care due to their Children ceases the effects of it are to extend as far as possibly they can and the Provisions they have made in their Life time are understood to be intended as nature requires they should for their Children whom after themselves they are bound to provide for though the dying Parents by express Words declare nothing about them nature appoints the the descent of their Property to their Children who thus come to have a Title and natural Right of â—nheritance to their Fathers Goods which the rest of Mankind cannot pretend to 90. Were it not for this right of being nourished and maintained by their Parents which God and nature has given to Children and obliged Parents to as a duty it would be reasonable that the Father should Inherit the Estate of his Son and be prefer'd in the Inheritance before his Grand Child for to the Grand Father there is due a long Score of care and expences laid out upon the Breeding and Education of his Son
and so give Right of Succession And in this Case Inheritance or Primogeniture can in its self have no Right no pretence to it any farther then that Consent which Established the Form of the Government hath so settled the Succession and thus we see the Succession of Crowns in several Countries places it on different Heads and he comes by right of Succession to be a Prince in one place who would be a Subject in another 95. If God by his positive Grant and revealed Declaration fiâ—st gave Rule and Dominion to any Man he that will Claim by that Title must have the same positive Grant of God for his Succession for if that has not directed the Course of its descent and conveyance down to others no body can succeed to this Title of the first Ruler and hereto Children have no right of Inheritance and Primogeniture can lay no Claim unless God the Author of this Constitution hath so ordained it Thus we see the pretensions of Sauls Family who received his Crown from the immediate Appointment of God ended with his Reign And David by the same Title that Saul Reignd viz. Gods appointment succeeded in his Throne to the exclusion of Ionathan and all pretensions of Paternal Inheritance And if Solomon had a right to succâ—ed his Father it must be by some other Title then that of Primogeniture A Cadet or Sisters Son must have the Preference in Succession if he has the same Title the first Lawful Prince had And in Dominion that has its Foundation only in the positive appointment of God himself Benjamin the youngest must have the Inheritance of the Crown if God so direct as well as one of that Tribe had the first Possession 96. If Paternal Right the Act of Begetting give a Man Rule and Dominion Inheritance or Primogeniture can give no Title for he that cannot succeed to his Fathers Title which was Begetting cannot succeed to that Power over his Brethren which his Father had by Paternal Right over them but I shall have more to say on this by and by This is plain in the mean time that any Government whether supposed to be at first founded in Paternal Right Consent of the People or the Positive Appointment of God himself which can supersede either of the other and so begin a new Government upon a new Foundation I say any Government began upon either of these can by Right of Succession come to those only who have the Title of him they succeed to Power founded on Contract can descend only to him who has Right by that Contract Power founded on Begetting he only can have that Begets and Power founded on the positive Grant or Donation of God he only can have by Right of Succession to whom that Grant directs it 97. From what I have said I think this is clear that a Right to the use of the Creatures being founded Originally in the Right a Man has to subsist and enjoy the conveniences of Life and the natural Right Children have to Inherit the goods of their Parents being founded in the Right they have to the same Subsistance and Commodities of Life out of the Stock of their Parents who are therefore taught by natural Love and Tenderness to provide for them as a part of themselves and all this being only for the good of the Proprietor or Heir It can be no reason for Childrens Inheriting of Rule and Dominion which has another Original and a different end nor can Primogeniture have any Pretence to a Right of solely Inheriting either Property or Power as we shall in its due place see more fully 't is enough to have shew'd here that Adams Property or Private Dominion could not convey any Sovereignty or Rule to his Heir who not having a Right to Inherit all his Fathers Possessions could not thereby come to have any Sovereignty over his Brethren and therefore if any Sovereignty on account of his Property had been vested in Adam which in Truth there was not yet it would have died with him 98. As Adam's Sovereignty if he had by vertue of being Proprietor of the whole World had any Authority over Men could not have been Inherited by any of his Children over the rest because they had all Title to divide the Inheritance and every one had a Right to a Portion of his Fathers Possessions so neither could Adam's Sovereignty by Right of Fatherhood if any such he had descend to any one of his Children for it being in our A s account a Right acquired by Begetting to Rule over those he had begotten it was not a Power possible to be Inherited because the Right being consequent to and built on an Act perfectly Personal made that Power so too and impossible to be Inherited for Paternal Power being a natural Right arising only from the relation of Father and Son is as impossible to be Inherited as the relation it self and a Man may pretend as well to Inherit the conjugal Power the Husband whose Heir he is had over his Wife as he can to Inherit the Paternal Power of a Father over his Children For the Power of the Husband being founded on Contract and the Power of the Father on Begetting he may as well Inherit the Power obtained by the conjugal Contract which was only Personal as he may the Power obtained by Begetting which could reach no farther then the Person of the Begetter unless begetting can be a Title to Power in him that does not beget 99. Which makes it a reasonable question to ask whether Adam dying before Eve his Heir suppose Cain or Seth should have had by Right of Inheriting Adam's Fatherhood Sovereign Power over Eve his Mother for Adams Fatherhood being nothing but a Right he had to Govern his Children because he begot them he that Inherits Adam's Fatherhood inherits nothing even in our A s sense but the the Right Adam had to Govern his Children because he begot them so that the Monarchy of the Heir would not have taken in Eve or if it did it being nothing but the Fatherhood of Adam descended by Inheritance the Heir must have Right to Govern Eve because Adam begot her For Fatherhood is nothing else 100. Perhaps it will be said with our A that a Man can alien his Power over his Child and what may be transfer'd by compact may be possessed by Inheritance I answer a Father cannot Alien the Power he has over his Child he may perhaps to some degrees forfeit it but cannot transfer it and if any other Man acquire it 't is not by the Fathers Grant but some Act of his own For example a Father unnaturally careless of his Child sells or gives him to another Man and he again exposes him a third Man finding him breeds up cherishes and provides for him as his own I think in this Case no body will doubt but that the greatest part of filial Duty and Subjection was here owing and to be paid to this Foster Father
and how far he may make use of his Freedom and so comes to have it till then some body else must guide him who is presumed to know how far the Law allows a Liberty If such a state of Reason such an Age of Discretion made him free the same shall make his Son free too Is a Man under the Law of England what made him free of that Law that is to have the Liberty to dispose of his Actions and Possessions according to his own Will within the Permission of that Law A capacity of knowing that Law Which is supposed by that Law at the Age of Twenty one and in some cases sooner If this made the Father free it shall make the Son free too Till then we see the Law allows the Son to have no Will but he is to be guided by the Will of his Father or Guardian who is to understand for him And if the Father die and fail to substitute a Deputy in this Trust if he hath not provided a Tutor to govern his Son during his Minority during his Want of Understanding the Law takes care to do it some other must govern him and be a Will to him till he hath attained to a state of Freedom and his Understanding be fit to take the Government of his Will But after that the Father and Son are equally free as much as Tutor and Pupil after Nonage equally Subjects of the same Law together without any Dominion left in the Father over the Life Liberty or Estate of his Son whether they be only in the State and under the Law of Nature or under the positive Laws of an Establish'd Government 60. But if through defects that may happen out of the ordinary Course of Nature any one comes not to such a degree of Reason wherein he might be supposed capable of knowing the Law and so living within the Rules of it he is never capable of being a Free Man he is never let loose to the disposure of his own Will because he knows no bounds to it has not Understanding its proper Guide but is continued under the Tuition and Government of others all the time his own Understanding is uncapable of that Charge And so Lunaticks and Ideots are never set free from the Government of their Parents Children who are not as yet come unto those years whereat they may have and Innocents which are excluded by a natural defect from ever having Thirdly Madmen which for the present cannot possibly have the use of right Reason to guide themselves have for their Guide the Reason that guideth other Men which are Tutors over them to seek and procure their good for them says Hooker Eccl. Pol. lib. 1. § 7. All which seems no more than that Duty which God and Nature has laid on Man as well as other Creatures to preserve their Off-spring till they can be able to shift for themselves and will scarce amount to an instance or proof of Parents Regal Authority 61. Thus we are born free as we are born rational not that we have actually the Exercise of either Age that brings one brings with it the other too And thus we see how natural Freedom and Subjection to Parents may consist together and are both founded on the same Principle A Child is free by his Father's Title by his Father's Understanding which is to govern him till he hath it of his own The Freedom of a man at years of discretion and the Subjection of a Child to his Parents whilst yet short of it are so consistent and so distinguishable that the most blinded Contenders for Monarchy by Right of Fatherhood cannot miss of it the most obstinate cannot but allow of it For were their Doctrine all true were the right Heir of Adam now known and by that Title setled a Monarch in his Throne invested with all the Absolute Unlimited Power Sr. R. F. talks of If he should dye as soon as his Heir were born must not the Child notwithstanding he were never so free never so much sovereign be in subjection to his Mother and Nurse to Tutors and Gonours till Age and Education brought him Reason and Ability to govern himself and others The Necessities of his Life the Health of his Body and the Information of his Mind would require him to be directed by the Will of others and not his own and yet will any one think that this Restraint and Subjection were inconsistent with or spoiled him of that Liberty or Sovereignty he had a Right to or gave away his Empire to those who had the Government of his Nonage This Government over him only prepared him the better and sooner for it If any body should ask me When my Son is of Age to be free I shall answer Just when his Monarch is of Age to govern But at what time says the judicious Hooker Eccl. Pol. l. 1. § 6. a man may be said to have attain'd so far forth the use of Reason as sufficeth to make him capable of those Laws whereby he is then bound to guide his Actions this is a great deal more easie for sense to discern than for any one by Skill and Learning to determine 62. Commonwealths themselves take notice of and allow that there is a time when Men are to begin to act like Free Men and therefore till that time require not Oaths of Fealty or Allegiance or other publick owning of or Submission to the Government of their Countreys 63. The Freedom then of Man and Liberty of acting according to his own Will is grounded on his having Reason which is able to instruct him in that Law he is to govern himself by and make him know how far he is left to the freedom of his own will To turn him loose to an unrestrain'd Liberty before he has Reason to guide him is not the allowing him the priviledge of his Nature to be free but to thrust him out amongst Brutes and abandon him to a state as wretched and as much beneath that of a Man as theirs This is that which puts the Authority into the Parents hands to govern the Minority of their Children God hath made it their business to imploy this Care on their Off-spring and hath placed in them suitable Inclinations of Tenderness and Concern to temper this power to apply it as his Wisdom designed it to the Childrens good as long as they should need to be under it 64. But what reason can hence advance this Care of the Parents due to their Off-spring into an Absolute Arbitrary Dominion of the Father whose power reaches no farther than by such a Discipline as he finds most effectual to give such strength and health to their Bodies such vigour and rectitude to their Minds as may best fit his Children to be most useful to themselves and others and if it be necessary to his Condition to make them work when they are able for their own Subsistence But in this power the Mother too has her