blood c. which he makes the reason and foundation of the following sentence Ezekiel 21.24 25 26. Plea c. pag. 21. Nec expenditur hodie quâ culpâ exsiderint possessione quam bonam de se spem praebeant quam integroriâ— administratione futuros existimens quos susceperint â—uendos Vna causa satis fuerit propinquus est Rex natus est repeâ—it nativum â—uulum Denique in postremis habetur cui popularis status afflicti Reipub funditus collabentis culpa imputetur Excidium Holmense p. 505. Truths manifest p. 23. Ezekiel also threatning the same judgement saith Because you have made your iniquity to be remembred in that your transgression is discovered so that in all your doings your sins appear because I say that ye are come to remembrance ye shall be taken with the hand And thou prophane wicked Prince of Israel whose day is come when iniquity shall have an end Thus saith the Lord God remove the Diadem and take off the Crown this shall not be the same Nebuchadnezer had no lawful superior power over the King of Judah nor the Medes and Persians over the King of Babylon but the demerits of the Kings of Judah and Babylon made their dispossession just before God These Apostate Non-scribers have oft presented the late King before God as a man of blood as a perjured oppressing Tyrane and yet now he is blameless We never heard yet alledged say they nor do acknowledge good reason or ground on mans part for the matters to have been done These men sin being condemned of themselves We may justly say as Albertus Kranâ—zius saith in a like case Christiern the second King of Denmark and his Son were expelled out of the Kingdom for Tyranny both of them breathed out threatnings agâ—inst them that had exiled them yet many favour'd them in their deserved misery who detested them in their exorbitant Domination It 's not regarded now saith he by what fault they fell out of possâ—ssion what hope of future amendment may be expected how just they will be in governing by them that have undertaken to defend them but one thing is enough he is a Kinsman a King born he endeavours to recover his native Title Lastly none considers to whom the fault of the peoples afflicted State and of the impendent utter ruine of the Common wealth is to be imputed The blood which hath been shed by the two last Kings which a Scotch Writer of no mean credit saith to be more then was shed by the Roman Emperors in the ten primitive persecutions the guilt whereof might have lain upon the Nation might the prerogative Lords and câ—joled Commons have had their will this blood I say of so many precious Saints and Martyrs as Non-scribers have often called them is now no more regarded by them then the blood of so many Doggs in a time of pestilence Yet since they put the question upon this issue that the warrant of persons is requâ—site to make an action lawful I shall joyn issue with them in tâ—is particular hoping not to be non-suited at the Bar of reason To evidence the want of Authority in the persons they lay down this proposition Plea c. Pag. 21. If a Government be made up of three Estates every of them being fundamental to the constitution one of them cannot take away another I distinguish of fundamentalness there are two sorts of foundations 1. A natural foundation as the ground soyle earth or native Rock is to an house 2. Artâ—ficial as the stones that are first laid upon that soyle or natural foundation So there are two sorts of Estates fundamental to the constitution of every publick body that deserves to be called free 1. Those that are originally fundamental viz. a common supreme Councel of Deputies or Representers freely chosen by the people in whom the power of making Lawes constitutions and offices rests 2. Those that are ascititiously fundamental or derivatively builded up upon the originally fundamental estate who have a power judicial or executive committed to them Those fundamental Estates which are derivatively so may not take away one another but the estate which is properly fundamental may take away the other and be blameless in case of breach of trust or abuse of power entrusted to them But Non-scribers apprehend tâ—e powers they speak of to be equally Coordinate Plea c. page 22. so that the whole force of the sence of their argument is this Coordinate Powers have no power to take away each other King Lords and Commons are coordinate Powers Ergo. I deny both propositions and shall shew first the erroneousness of the Minor In so doing I shall shew them 1. Rights of the Kingdom p. 86. alibi passim That the power of the King was not a coordinate power with that of the Representatives of the people not an absolute and perfect coordinate which appears 1. From the nature of the Kings power Our Lawyers divide the powers of this Nation into Original Judicial and Executive and affirm that the Kings power was but executive To make executive power coordinate with the nomothetical and original Rights of the Kingdom p. 19. were to make the Executioner equal with the Law-maker 2. From the Coronation-Oath wherein the King sware fealty to the State and Lawes as his higher Lords that I may speak as the Authour of the Rights of the Kingdom in which Oath the King sware to hold and guard Soveraign Power of Parliaments part 2. p. 75. confirm and defend the Lawes which the Commons should chuse De tuendo custodiendo justas Leges consuetudines Ecclesiae ac de faciendo per ipsum Domirum Regem eas esse protegendas confirmandas quas vulgus juste rationabiliter elegerit as Mr. Prinne gives us that clause of the Kings Oath out of a Parliament Roll and out of the Book of Clarencieux Hanley in English thus Will you grant fulfill defend all rightful Laws Customs which the Commons of the Realm shâ—ll chuse The King shall answer I grant and believe That power cannot be coordinate with the Law giving power which is obliged to all and cannot alter an apex or Title of those Lawes that another Estate shall chuse The mutual stipulation between King and people Appendix page 48. was that which was constituted a King of England before this past he was but Regni candidatus Non-scribers tell us that the Kings of this Realm are legally and actually Kings upon the death of their respective Predecessors and this say they Lawyers and Historians will satisfie among whom they chose Speed to urge in which quotation I profess I admire that men brought up in the study of good Arts to say nothing of the conscience they pretend to should so over-shoot themselves as not to be able to distinguish between what Speed relates as an Historian Speed Rich. 1. S. 3. and what corrupt glosses he put upon
Democratical the Government of these Deligates is Oligarchical they being chosen out of the wealthiest of every County and both these put together make up a Pol ty as Aristotle calls it but as Plato whose termes differ from Aristottles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To prove the erection of this unlawful they much labour but that toyl of theirs might very well have been spared The people of this Land have in all ages had a supreme power over their King and Lords which was exercised by their Representatives who by old Lawes were to meet twice a year and by a latter Statute once a year though the Tyranny of wicked Kings had brought that of late into a disuse Which prescription notwithstanding cannot take away the Peoples right It s vulgarly said That no prescription lies against the Kings Exchequer much less can a prescription lie against the People who are greater then the Prince and for whose sake the Prince hath that priviledge Dicores quatuor esse in quibus sita est tota vis Majestas Reipublicae nimirum Jus Magistratuum creandorum Deliberationes omnes de Pace de Bello Legum lationes tandèmque Provocationes Donatus Janottius de Repub Venetâ pag. 59. Speed Book 5. Chap. 5. Suma imperii bellique administrandi communi concilio commissa est â—assivellauâ—e Nostro adventu commoti Britani hunc toti bello imperióque praefecerant Caesar Commenter lâ—b 5. Spe. d. lib. 7. cap. 1. S. 6. saith Junius Brutus The form of Government is that which dat esse operari as Non-scribers say and natural order and reason requires that propriae operationes propriae formae respondeant if therefore it be proved that the Representatives have ever had de jure a power to do the Acts proper to the supreme power it will follow that the supreme power was formally in them and that they were a Common-wealth having supreme Authority in themselves Let me here use the words of a learned Florentine I say saith he that there are four things in which the whole power and Majesty of every politique body is placed the power of creating Magistrates all deliberations concerning Peace and Warre making of Lawes and the last appeales If therefore the Representatives of the people have had the right to create all general Magistrates to consult of Peace and Warre to make and abrogate Lawes and the priviledge of the last appeal to be made to them they have been the supreme power That they have had these Rights I shall prove and begin first with Creation of Magistrates Julius Caesar before whose entrance into this Island the times are obscure through whose mists no Eagles eyes can pierce as the beloved Historian of Non-scribers Speed confesseth found the supreme power of electing Magistrates in a Common-Councel of the people The chief power of Rule and administring the Warre was by a Common Councel committed to Cassivellauâ—e And again the Britâ—ains being troubled at our landing set him that is Cassivellaune over the whole Warre and Empire The Common Councel then that made Cassivellaune King and General was a Tan-Britanicum an Assembly representing all Britain And when the Romans quitted their tooting here the Britains being invaded by the Picts joyntly united their meanes and powers and with one consent elect a King to manage those affairâ—s which was Vortigerne whom afterwards they deposed and elected his Sonne Vortimer But I must for further satisfaction in this point refer them to the Authour of the Rights of the Kingdom who after many Examples of such Creation of Kings concludes thus We see the Law at lest the â—ustom of those times both for electing anointing judging and executing of Kings themselves among our British Ancestors Conceâ—ning our Saxon Ancestors saith the same Authour the Minor is very clear that they did elect or chuse their Kings from among themselves who well agrees therein with the witness of Tacitus Rights of the Kingdom p. 55. Rights of the Kingdom p. 35. Reges ex nâ—bilitate duces ex virtute sumunt Tacitus de moribus Germanorum Soveraign Power of Parliaments part â— p 78. Soveraign Power of Parliaments part 2. p. 41. Soveraign Power of Parliaments part 1. p. 91. who speaking of the ancient Germans of whom the Saxons were a branch saith they chose their Kings for their Nobility their Leaders for their vertue which Testimony informs us that they enobled some for their vertues and out of them chose their Kings Concerning the Normans I have spoken already To conclude with the Testimony of Mr. Prinne who tells us That our Parliament and Kingdom observe the opposition anciently have both claimed and exercised a Supreme Power over the Crown of England it self and that we may be sure what he meanes by Parâ—iament in another place he saith out of Fortescue Chancellor of England in Henry the sixth's time that Kings were created and elected at first by the general Votes of the people from whom alone they receive all their lawful Authority having still no other or greater lawful power then they conferred on them only for the defence of Lawes Persons Liberties Estates and the Republicks welfare which they may regulate augment or diminish for the common good as they see just cause Neither did the setting of Kings over them divest them of the supreme power it self if Mr. Prinne while a defender of Parliaments may be credited I doubt not saith he but our Parliaments Kings and all other Nations would say they never intended to erect such an absolute eternal unlimited Monarchy over them and that they ever intended to reserve the absolute original soveraign jurisdiction in themselves that if their Princes should degenerate into Tyrants they might have a remedy to preserve themselves An impregnable evidence that the whole Kingdom and Parliament representing it observe what is a Parliament the Representative of a Kingdom and then not the Lords that represent no body are the most Soveraign power and above the King because having the supreme jurisdiction in them at first they never totally transferred it to the King but reserved it in themselves I should tire my Reader should I say all that might be said concerning the Commons Creation of other Magistrates Soveraigâ— Power of Parliaments part 2. p. 7. Mr. Prinne brings in Sir Edward Cook affirming that the Lord Chancellor Treasurer privy Sealâ— Lord chief Justice Privy Councellors Heretoches Sheriffs with all Officers of the Kingdom of England and Constables of Castles were usuâ—lly elected by the Parliament to whom of ancient right their election belonged who being commonly stiled the Lord Chancellor Treasurer chief Justice c. of England not of the King were of right elected by the Representative body of the Realm of England to whom they were accountable for their misdemeanors Rights of the Kingdom p. 77. 78. 2. All consultations of Peace and Warre of right appertain to the Commons of England It was the great Councel saith the Authour of the Rights
withall engaged themselves to hold the Countrey of the Netherlands under the obedience of their Prince and natural Lord as they ought to do for so are the words of their protestation in Mr. Prinne's Book yet in the year 1581 Hugo Grotius de Antiq Reâ—p Batavicae cap. 5. Paulus Merula de statu Reip. Bataviae Diatâ—iba Johannes de Latt Descrip Belgicae tit Hollandia cap. 7. Henricus Sâ—terus Suecia pag. 131. Seq pag. 202. 206. 216. they solemnly abjured the King of Spâ—ine who was â—â—e Hereditary Earle of Holland And the Earles of Holland were not in any thing short of a justly regulated King and had as much Authority there as the Kings of England among us as the Authors in the Margin inform us The States of Sweden in the year 1544 changed their Elective Kingdom into an Hereditary which they entayled upon Ericus the eldest Son of Gustavus their King then and his issue male and if such issue failed upon John the Kings second Son and his heirs male and in like manner upon Magnus and Charles Duke of Sudermannia the Kings younger Children to this they sware solemnly Yet Ericus for his Tyranny was deposed by the States and John the second Brother crowned he dying and leaving Sigismund King of Poland and John Duke of Ostrogothia his 2. sons behind him Sigismund was crowned King of Sweden yet because he endeavoured to destroy the Protestant Religion established among them and Warred upon them he was deposed by an Act of the States Assembled at Stockholm in the year 1599 and in the year 1600 both he his posterity excluded from all government in Sweden by a Decree of the States assembled at Lincop nay more they excluded from the Kingdom John Duke of Ostrogothia the brother of Sigismund because they feared lest he out of naturall love to his brother should enter into any part or Covenant with Sigismund and his heires which might bring detriment to their countrey and then they chose Charles Duke of Sudermannia for their King And if the States of Holland might abjure their Earl and not be scandalous to us nay and we joyn with them as our Nation did in Queen Elizabeth's dayes if the States of Sweden might abjure Sigismund Ministri in hac sententia constanter permanserunt posse viz. Magistratum sub leges vi cogi Buchanan Rerum Scot. lib. 17. his brother and issue and not be scandalous to us nay more and we help Gustavus the Son of Charles whose right was built upon Sigismund's ruine I can see no cause why our actions and engagement should be scandalous to any honest man among them or any other Nation that approved the equity of those actions in Holland or Sweden Scotland it may be will frowne because the current of Pensions from England is stopt but they that laid the foundation of Reformation in Scotland were of another mind then their present Kirkmen Mr. Knox defended the Lawfulness of putting Tyrants to death in a Generall Assembly In the Scotch Queen Maries dayes Buchanan Rerum Scot. lib. 20. Magis formidamus nimiae lenitatis apud omnes bonos reprehensionem quà m apud malâ—s crudelitatis calumnium Actio contra Mariam Scotorum Reginam pag. 100. Plea c. page 60. the Ministers were constant in this opinion that the Magistrate might be brought by force under the Lawes and the Earl of Morton and other Scotch Lords Ambassadors to Queen Elizabeth justified their deposition of Mary and affirmed that they might by the Law of Nature and their Countrey have dealt more severely with her and that her life and the successors of her Son depended upon their clemency their Oration which was presented to Queen Elizabeth a Latin Printed Copy whereof I have ends thus We more feare to be reprehended by good men for our over-much Lenity then we do to be slandered by the bad with cruelty Were Scotlands Kirkmen the true successors of Mr. Knox and Buchanan we could not offend them but we being their successors in the truthes they professed and the Scots Apostatizing we may well cast them in with Non-scribers and contemne the offences they take against us with Let them alone c. But the imposing of the Engagement say Non-scribers is scandalous because it takes away the Liberty of Conscience which the Imposers professedly maintain and they cannot see any reason but that they should leave Conscience free in Civill matters who would have it free in matters of Religion But besides that the Imposers of the Engagement have not for ought I know owned the Patronage of so vaâ—â— Libertinisme in matters of Religion as Non-scribers would â—ather upon them their Argument may be retorted upon themselves It is scandalous that they who hold tolleration of difference in outward formes of Discipline unlawfull should claime a tolleration in Civill matters and it would be scandalous in the Magistrate to tollerate any thing Festus Hommius col Anti-Bellarminianum Disp 34. Thes 4.5 Sam. Bolton Arraignment of error pag. 335. 336. Plea c. pag. 61. or to grant any priviledge which by the Priviledged is looked upon under the Notion of sin and Learned Presbyterians into the number of whom Non-scribers itch to be received rank opinions destructive to the publike Peace with such as are blasphemous and contrary to Fundamentall truthes and allow the Magistrate an equall nay greater Power to punish them that are seditious then them that are so erroneous Concerning the Agreement of the People I have this only to say that the Parliament never owned it and therefore Non-scribers do meerly Calumniate them in laying it at their doores But their new strain of Poetry wherein they would make Sphynx a resolver of riddles I must say that for ought I have read Isti quidem orationi Oedipos epus conjectori est qui Sphyngi interpres fuit Plautus in Paenulo Act. 1. Scen. 3. Plea c. page 42. the proposing of riddles is onely attributed to Sphynx the resolution to Oedipus And for the Riddle it self since Non-scribers are the Sphynges I will make them according to their own Poetry the unriddlers Non-scribers call the Government by Kings Lords and Commons the constitution of the People yet make the People subject to it So that the people by their own concessions may have a radicall virtuall Power of Soveraignty which when they have derived and it is in the Magistrate formally they are to obey the Magistrate made by them The people as a Community gave their Power to their Representatives as singulars are required to Engage They who aggregately as a Community are the Originall of power may severally and personally be the Recipients of it The rest of their Rhetorick is spent in bewayling the Tyranny Plea c. page 61. 62. 64. oppression Injustice which our Nation as they say is under notwithstanding the imposers of the Engagement professe opposition to Tyranny and make Justice and Liberty their Motto But that you may know