disband the Army and dismiss the Souldiers which was accordingly done telling him in his Letter that things being come to that extremity that he had been forced to send away the Queen and his Son that they might not fall into the Enemies Hands he himself was obliged to do the same thing And presently after his Majesty was taken by the Inhabitants of Feversham in a small Vessel endeavouring to go out of the Nation And after this it is manifest the Prince never considered him as King of England but as his Prisoner or as a Person conquered It is true the Lords invited him back to London but it was without the Prince's Consent and in all Likelihood without his Knowledg For although he treated him with all imaginable Respect as a Person so nearly related to himself and the Princess and with a due Regard to Majesty with which he had been so lately vested yet still it was but like a Person conquered For understanding he was at Rochester he sent to him to continue there by Monsieur Zulestein but he missing of him he sent another Order after him to remove from Whitehall whither he was gone to Ham. The Message was to be delivered by the Marquess of Hallifax the Earl of Shrewsbury and the Lord Delamere after the Prince's Guards were in possession of the Posts about Whitehall and a Note drawn up to that Purpose Likewise the Prince committed the Earl of Feversham to the Castle of Windsor who had been sent by the King to invite him to St. James's And if he committed the Servant to Prison it is not hard to determine in what Condition he judged the Master to be Princes do not use to imprison each others Servants sent on kind Messages while their Masters are free that is as King James in his Reasons for withdrawing himself from Rochester words it against the Practice and Law of Nations But the Truth is he considered him as a Prince conquered by him and treated him accordingly although with all imaginable Respect and with great Tenderness This is the plain meaning of such Actions and in this Sense King James understood them and therefore he sent to desire leave of the Prince to return to Rochester which was granted And in this Sense he interprets them in his Reasons for withdrawing himself from Rochester For having mentioned them he adds these memorable Words I was born Free and I desire to continue so Wherefore in his own Opinion his going privately from Rochester into France was no other than an Escape out of Captivity or rather out of a Conqueror's Hands whose Prisoner he was I insist the longer upon these things for the sake of such as own Conquest upon a just Quarrel to be a good Title as indeed it is but say the Prince did not make use of his Fortune but declined it by leaving the Matter to the Convention Of which I shall say more hereafter when I come to answer Objections In the mean time I will contract into a narrow Compass what I have said at large that so the Reader may at once take a View of it Here were violent Presumptions of an unsufferable Injury done to the Prince and a Refusal of giving reasonable Satisfaction to the last a marching down with an Army to oppose him when he came to examine the Truth Two Battels fought how much Blood spilt it matters not in both which the Prince had the better The King fled before the Prince to London from thence towards Gravesend went on board a Vessel in order to leave the Nation without deputing a Vice-Roy is brought back again but being used as he thought like a Prisoner makes his Escape a second time and leaves the Nation And now good Reader do not deceive thy self nor suffer thy self to be imposed upon by the little Pretences of such Men whose Interest it is never to be satisfied consider well and judg impartially What was there wanting in the Case of King James to make it fall short of a Conquest There can be no Objections against this as it seems to me of any great Moment however I will not pass by unanswered any Scruple that I can foresee and much less any Objection that I know hath been made In the 1st Place it hath been said The Prince by his fair Pretences in his Declaration stole away the Hearts of his Majesty's Subjects and Souldiers so that they forsook him and therefore he may be said rather to have been betray'd than conquer'd To this I answer two things 1st That the Prince's Declaration was most reasonable and thought to be so by the most considerable both for Learning and Quality of those that now refuse the Oath who therefore urged the King over and over to condescend without Fighting to his Demand of referring all Differences to a Free Parliament And since his Majesty's Refusal was a Refusal to give Satisfaction about the Rights and Liberties of the Nation which had been infringed and about the Succession to the Crown which was suspected to be in Danger of being altered It is more than any Man can prove that the Subject was bound to assist the King especially if we add that if he had got the Victory it must in all Probability have ended in the utter Subversion of our Laws and legal Government and in the Destruction of our Rights both Civil and Religious That Subjects may not resist the King although he indeavour their Destruction unjustly hath been taught and that is Loyalty enough in all Reason But that they are bound to assist him to destroy the main Body of a Nation is such a Notion of Loyalty as will not down with wise Men. But 2dly Supposing the King had been unjustly betray'd by his Subjects and Souldiers or deserted by them who ought to have stood by him in the Quarrel what was that to the Prince who was none of the King 's Subject but a Soveraign Prince It behoved the King to have assured himself of the Loyalty and Courage of his own Souldiers and People And if he did not and was therefore beaten it was never the less a Conquest over him because his Men either would not or durst not fight For when Princes take the Field the Question as to Right of Conquest is which overcomes not whether his Souldiers that is overcome fought or not nor whether his Subjects adhered firmly to him or not When Henry Duke of Lancaster came into England and gathered an Army traiterously against his Soveraign King Richard the Second who was then in Ireland the King sent the Earl of Salisbury before him into England to gather an Army against his Coming over But staying longer than the time by himself appointed the Army would no longer be kept together The King coming over and finding that they were dispersed and hearing that all the Castles from the Borders of Scotland and Bristol were delivered to the Duke and that the greatest part of
out as appears by his many gracious Concessions at that time and especially to name no more by his passing the Bill for the Continuance of the Parliament not to be Prorogued or Adjourned but by Act of Parliament 3. If he would make any use of his Success it should have been to the Good of the Nation as settled under her lawful Prince But what had he and his Creatures to do to dissolve the Government especially to usurp the Supreme Power himself since he got it not either by the Consent of the King or of the Nation both which had been in his Case necessary A great deal more might be said to shew the Disparity between that and our present Settlement but I refer the Reader to Dr. Sherlock's Case of Allegiance due to Sovereign Powers where he will find the Prejudices raised from the Rump Parliament the Protector and the Committee of Safety removed Nor doth my asserting their Majesties Right acquired by Conquest at all thwart the Determination of the Convention viz. That the late King James Abdicated the Government and left the Throne Vacant For that the late King was Conquered and that he Abdicated the Government are not inconsistent It was by his own fault that he fell into such a Condition as that he thought it unsafe to stay in England yea and even to the last if he would have consented that the Ends of the Prince's Declaration might have been gained he needed not to have left us And since he rather chose to go away than to do Right either to Us or the Prince and did so without deputing a Vice-Roy what was this but to Abdicate us For certainly if a Prince rather chooseth to desert his People than to do what is just and reasonable when that and no more is made the Condition of his continuing with them he may be truly said to throw up the Government and to leave them to shift for themselves But of this enough That Vote of the Convention and the Methods of settling the Government thereupon taken have been justified by other Pens and the doing of it is not now my Province But then since it was the Success of the Prince's Arms that made him go away or rather since he would not have gone away had it not been for that Success it might be a Conquest too and I think I have proved it to have been so in the Sense I have explained my self that is it had attending it the principal Reasons that make Conquest a good Title and that is enough for our Satisfaction SECT IV. Concluding with some necessary Consequences of the three foregoing Propositions I Must now draw towards a Conclusion I hope I have proved my three Propositions 1. That King William and Queen Mary had a just Quarrel against King James 2. That they conquered him And 3. That Conquest is in this case a good Title I am sure I have offered nothing but what I thought to be Reason Nor have I baulk'd any Objection because it was too hard to be answered I will conclude with some Inserences from what I have written And 1. It follows That our most gracious Soveraigns King William and Queen Mary in order to gain these Kingdoms and in ascending the Throne have done nothing but what is consistent with Justice and Honour For if they had a just Cause of War with King James and have conquered him in the Sense I have said and Conquest be in this Case a good Title and it were absolutely necessary not only for the Interest of these Kingdoms but also for that of Europe and the Protestant Religion that they should make use of their Success then have they in so doing acted nothing but what became them And the asserting of this since it is true is a necessary piece of Gratitude to our glorious Deliverers And I the rather do it because I observe that many of the Tracts that have been written on the behalf of the Oath of Allegiance are rather in desence of the Subjects Submission and taking of it than of their Majesties Title So that the Authors seem rather concerned for their own than their Majesties Vindication and however glad they are of the unexpected Deliverance that hath been wrought for them yet are they over-regardless of the Honour of those blessed Princes who have been in God's Hands the Instruments of it 2. The Subject is justified in swearing and paying Allegiance to them and that as to Princes de jure For they have on their side all the Right of Conquest consequent to a just War and at a time when it was absolutely necessary to insist upon it 3. Those that refuse to swear Allegiance to their Majesties thereby doing what in them lies to weaken their Hands and so to hinder their good Purposes are guilty of a very great Sin And I the rather say this because I am apt to think a great many honest Men who are not very confident of the Unlawfulness of the Oath do judg it however best to refuse it because they believe they cannot sin in so doing but may in taking it Whereas whoever well considers our present Circumstances and the Matters depending must grant that if it be lawful to swear not-swearing is a Sin attended with much more dangerous Consequences than is Swearing supposing it to be unlawful And a Man's erring in the Negative has greater Aggravations than in the Affirmative 4. That King James hath totally lost his Right to these Kingdoms and therefore if he comes again with an Army he is to be looked upon by the Subjects with no other Eyes than any other Invader but is to be resisted by them Our Fleets and Armies without any scruple of Conscience to weaken their Hands may and ought to fight as becomes valiant Men in the defence of their present Soveraigns and their Countrey and that not only against the French King but likewise against the late King James if he should come along with a Fleet or head an Army against us 5. No Man need trouble himself with any Scruple as touching any Right of the Prince of Wales supposing him to be Genuine or of whatever other Issue the late King may since his Birth have had or may hereafter have For as to the pretended Prince his Birth being doubtful his Father declined the Arbitrement of a Parliament and put it to the Decision of the Sword and the Sword hath determined against him and therefore if he hath any Wrong done him he hath no body to blame but his Father And here I cannot but take notice of the Folly of some People who after King James was conquered and gone expected the Parliament should have examined the Birth of the Child as if when Princes fall out and the Injurer is utterly vanquished the injured Victor is still obliged to accept of the same Satisfaction that would have contented him before he drew his Sword Or as if when a Doubt about the Succession is
KING WILLIAM AND QUEEN MARY Conquerors OR A DISCOURSE Endeavouring to prove that Their MAJESTIES have on Their Side against the Late King the Principal Reasons that make CONQUEST a Good TITLE Shewing also how this is consistent with that Declaration of Parliament King James Abdicated the Government c. Written with an especial Regard to such as have hither-to refused the Oath and yet incline to allow of the Title of Conquest when Consequent to a Just WAR Licensed January 11. 1693. Edmund Bohun London Printed for Richard Baldwin near the Oxford Arms in Warwick-Lane and at the Black Lyon between the Two Temple Gates in Fleet-Street 1693 THE PREFACE THE very hard measure that King Charles the First met with hath raised in the Minds of all good Men a just Abhorrence both of the Persons and Principles that caused his Sufferings And as it commonly falls out we have been apt to run into extreams on the other Hand We are not content to disown with Indignation the Barbarities that he endured but are apt to think that a Crowned Head can never ake but the Subject is in some fault let the Occasion be what it will The Church of England is very Loyal to all Kings by Principle but she was so to him likewise by the superadded Ties of Friendship And the singular Affection all her Members bore to that blessed Prince hath made them very favourable to the Sovereign's Cause however different from his and of this we have now a plain instance in the Adherence of so many of her Members to K. James in favour of whose Interest they are very partial even against their own K. Charles the First was a Friend to our Church and our Liberties and was ready upon Complaint to have redressed all our Grievances and to have confirmed our Rights before there appeared any armed Force to have compelled him But K. James the Second was the avowed Enemy of our Church and in order to her Ruin as well as out of a Desire of Arbitrary Power had many ways struck at the very Root of all our Civil Rights Nor did he ever shew the least Inclination to redress what had been done amiss it was so far from it that he threatned and imprisoned the Reverend Prelates for but petitioning to be excus'd from giving their helping Hand to the Destruction of the Church Themselves and the Laws until meer Necessity forced him to it and even then he gave us only Words some Superficial Promises of a Parliament to be held when we should have assisted him to drive our Champion out of the Nation ruin'd our Friends and left our selves wholly at his Disposal i. e. at the Mercy of the Jesuits And yet I am apt to think that one Reason that hath made some Men so very angry at such as were in Arms in favour of the Prince of Orange at his first Land was the black Idea of all Resistance against Sovereign Power formed in their Minds by that Rebellion against King Charles the First And I verily believe had not the Crown as well as his Life been most uunjustly ravished from him few would have hlamed the Estates for setting it upon the Head of his Grand-children after his Son had thrown it away However I mean not at this time at all to meddle with the Case of Subjects resisting their Sovereign much less to determine either way about it What I now intend is to assert the Right of King William and Queen Mary to the Crown of England and its Depednencies and consequently to the Allegiance of the Subject And I doubt not but to do it upon Principles not in the least Antimonarchical or suspected to be so without either asserting the Popish deposing Doctrine or that the People of England are the Sovereigns Masters and may call him to an Account and either depose or other ways punish him for his Misgovernments or even affirming that a King of England may be resisted there are other Principles not in the least scandalous that do intitle their Majesties to the Crown and to the Allegiance of the Subject But some will be ready to ask why I write on this Argument at this time of Day after the Matter hath been so canvassed and so many learned Men having already written upon it may be supposed to have aid all of Moment that is to be said upon it But my Answer is That notwithstanding all that hath been written a great many do yet remain unsatisfied And it grieves me to think that their Majesties who have run such mighty Hazards and done so much for us should still have so many secret Enemies in the Nation or if that be too hard a Character for some that have refused the Oath so many that are not yet such Hearty Friends as they ought to be That Protestants are so backward at making use of the fairest Opportunity of securing themselves and fencing against Popery that they have had these many Years which the Papists have given them by an over-active Zeal for their Destruction while Papists do readily embrace and make use of all Advantages against them tho never so foul That some who are seemingly zealous Sons of the Church of England should take such Measures as tend to her Destruction That such as have most bitterly declaimed against Separation from our Assemblies as a great Sin should themselves hold separate Meetings upon a meer State-point and as it seems to me be in the wrong Opinion too That any who mean honestly should be doing the French King's and the Papists Business at a time when the Protestant Cause and the Fate of Europe lie at Stake And lastly that any Conscientious and Learned Men should lose Preferments and that the Church should be deprived of the benefit of their Labours These are the Reasons that have at length overcome my great Aversion to writing The Argument I make use of hath indeed been lightly touched upon by some others and it could not well fall out otherwise within the compass of so much time as this Dispute hath been on Foot in But let not this Acknowledgment at the Entrance at all prejudice any Man against reading what I have written upon a Belief that I offer nothing new nothing but what he hath already met with and can answer for For any thing I know my manner of prosecuting it is different from what hath yet been published whether it be to better purpose or no the Reader is to judge But although it should not be so yet may it be of some use since oftentimes the same Arguments that have been rejected do prevail when urged in a different way although with a great deal less Skill But whether I have written better or worse upon this Subject than other Men is not at all the Question But whether or no I have made good my Undertaking I confess when I consider how subject all Men are to mistake and what Cause my after-thoughts have many times found of altering my
Judgment even where at the first I have had some measure of Assurance I distrust my Performance But when I abstract from my own Management set aside the Sence I have of my own Weakness and consider the force of the Arguments themselves I cannot but think them convincing and if I did not think so I would never have written However I shall leave all to the Reader 's Censure and to the Consideration of such as have hitherto refused the Oath of Allegiance when I have desired of them these few Things 1. That they would lay aside all Prejudices and read with Minds prepared to receive satisfaction 2. That they would not pass a Judgment against what I offer before they fully understand me and comprehend the force of my Reasoning 3. That they would consider over and over the Force of each Argument where several are offered and of each Answer to such Objections as are made and if one or more shall prove unsatisfactory that it may not hinder them from weighing impartially the rest Lastly that they would take in good part my charitable meaning And if any Man is pleased to write against what I have said I desire he will write like a Person that contends for Truth rather than Victory That he will neither trouble the Press nor me with any thing that I have already answered either explicitely or implicitely or that he himself can answer That he will avoid all undue Reflections and all bitter provoking Sarcasms remembring that he and I are both Christians however we differ about the Matter in dispute KING WILLIAM AND QUEEN MARY CONQUERORS SECT I. Their Majesties King William and Queen Mary had a just Ground of War with King James THE Question is Whether or no the Subject do owe Allegiance may lawfully and ought when required to swear Allegiance to K. William and Q. Mary in these Words I A. B. do sincerly Promise and Swear That I will be Faithful and bear True Allegiance to Their Majesties King William and Queen Mary So help me God I have undertaken to make good the Assirmative and before I proceed to Argument it is necessary in order to avoid Confusion hereafter that I premise Two Things 1. What I mean by being Faithful and bearing true Allegiance And here I shall grant the Non J 〈…〉 rs all they can desire 〈◊〉 That these Words ought to be understood in a Sense that a scrupulous Mind would last swear in That the Oath when taken doth not only oblige a Man to be a true Prisoner to pay Taxes and not to disturb the Government but to bear all the Allegiance to their Present Majesties that was ever owing to any King of England whatever although his Title was most indisputable so as is the late K. James himself should land in England and lay with an Army on the left Hand and K. William and Q. Mary with an Army on right yet so long as K. William and Q Mary were possessed of the Crown and the Regalia the Subjects were bound in Conscience to look upon J. as an Invader and every Man in his Place and Calling were to be aiding and assisting to K. William and Q. Mary the Priesthood with their Prayers the Militia with their Arms and the People with their Purses c In this Sense I am content to understand the Oath and I think it very probable that this is the Sense of the Imposers because they intended it as a means to secure the Crown to those on whose Heads they had plac'd it and less than this will not do it The 2d Thing to be premised is That I make no difficulty at all about any Title that Q. Mary may by some be supposed to have antecedent to that of K. William Because she having submitted her Right and being very well satisfied with the Share allotted her by the Convention no Man else hath any thing to do to move any Controversie about it Wherefore when I say Allegiance is due to K. William and Q. Mary I mean it in the Sense that the Oath it self implies it to be due to each of them which for ought any Man knows is the very Sense that each of them do best like of And these things being premised I now proceed There are three Topicks from whence we may argue for the Oath and as it seems to me from each of them very solidly 1. We may affirm That their present Majeâ—â—ies had a just Quarrel against the late King and conquered him and that Conquest is in such a Case a good Title 2. That the late King Abdicated the Crown and left the Throne vacant And that although the former Tit'e were not good yet the Convention having place I them there and the Body of the Nation submitted to them they have thereupon a good Title And 3. That their Majesties are possessed of the Crown and that Possession is in their Case a good Title although the other two should fail The two last I shall wave because they have been already very largely prosecuted by others and as it seems to me to good purpose however they have not hapned to give satisfaction to some Men. The first I shall endeavour to manage because however it may have been touch'd upon by some others yet hath it not been so fully laid open and urged by any that I know of as the other Two If in this I am mistaken I must plead for my excuse the Circumstances I am in especially my â—istance from Business and such Books as have been lately written which is to me unavoidable But the chief Reason that hath at this time determined my Choice to this Argument is Because I find that several who are not yet satisfied with any thing that hath been hitherto offered do declare That if it could be made appear that their present Majesties have on their side all the Right of Conquest they would entirely submit to the Government and take 〈◊〉 O 〈…〉 They are to be understood of a Conquest consequent to a just Quarrel and therefore it is that they so importunately demand our proving either the League with France or that the pretended Prince of Wales is not Genuine They seem to own that either of these would have been on the then Prince of Orange's part a just Ground of War and that thereupon he might lawfully have made use of his Success And if this be true then must the Conclusion be the same by whatever Argument we prove the Premises Wherefore for these Mens Satisfaction as well as for the vindicating of their Majesties and their Loyal Subjects in point of Honour and Conscience I have undertaken to do it And to put the matter if it be possible out of Controversie I shall endeavour to prove these three things 1. That their Majesties K. William and Q. Mary had a just Ground of War with K. James 2. That they conquered him And 3. That Conquest is in this their Case a good Title 1. Their
the Nobility and Commons took part with him and that his principal Counsellors had lost their Heads he fell so utterly to Despair that calling his Army together he licensed every Man to be gone and to shift for himself After which he was made a Prisoner and frightned into a Resignation of his Crown which was unjustly accepted of and confirmed by a Parliament illegally called by the Duke in the King's Name Here was never a Battel fought nor a Stroak struck the King's Subjects and Souldiers forsook him and went to Henry who was indeed a Traitor and consequently an Usurper both which are far from being in the present Case And yet Henry being placed in the Royal Seat and possessed of the Regalia thought it necessary to assure them that he meant not to take Advantage against any Man's Estate as coming in by Conquest but that every one should freely injoy his own as in the times of lawful Succession Here are a great many ill Circumstances that make all this unlawful in H's Doings which do not accompany the late Atchievements of our glorious Prince which do even as to the Question of Conquest leave the Advantage plainly on our Soveraign's side and yet we see Henry thinks good to assure them that he will not make use of his Victory we are to understand him against any Man but the King A plain Intimation that supposing his Quarrel to have been just and justly managed he thought he had the Right of Conquest on his Side yea and that he thought they were of the same Opinion for whose sakes he gave his Assurance A like Instance we have in two other Princes of the same Names Richard the Third and Henry the Seventh The Duke of Buckingham King R's Subject and Bishop Morton his Prisoner plot together that Henry Earl of Richmond Heir of the House of Lancaster should marry the Lady Elizabeth Heiress of the House of York and also to depose King R. Many of the King's Subjects join in the same Conspiracy While Henry lay at Lichfield with his Forces and K. Richard with his at Nottingham part of King Richard's Forces revolted to Henry and in the King's March towards him Sir Walter Hungerford and some others withdrew themselves from King R's Party And Sir John Savage Sir Brian Stamford and Sir Simon Digby with their several Forces joined with the Earl The Treachery was so plain that it was written over the Gate of the Duke of Norfolk who was faithful to King R. the Night before the Battel Jacky of Norfolk be not too bold For Dickon thy Master is bought and sold. Nay in the very Battel the Lord Stanley who had been sent to levy Forces for the King comes in and joins with the Earl and yet notwithstanding King Richard being slain and I hope to shew that the Case had been the same if he had only been driven out of the Nation and Henry obtaining the Crown the Lord Bacon saith Besides his other two Claims that of Heir to the House of Lancaster in his own Person and that of Heiress to the House of York with whom he meant to marry he had also the Title of Conquest And although he chose not to make such use of the Title of Conquest as of that of Heir to the House of Lancaster partly because he came in upon Conditions and Agreements and partly because he knew that to claim as a Conqueror was to put as well his own Party as the rest in Fear as that which gave him Power of disannulling of Laws and disposing of Mens Foutunes and Estates and the like Points of absolute Power yet he made use of it to beat down open Murmur and Dispute And afterwards he got the Crown to be entailed upon him by Act of Parliament and the said Act to be confirmed by the Pope's Bull the Year following with mention nevertheless by way of Rooâ—tal of his other Titles both of Descent and Conquest So as now saith the same learned Author the Wreath of three was made a Wreath of five for to the three first Titles of the two Houses or Lines and Conquest were added two more c. So that Henry the Seventh as wise a Prince as ever sway'd the English Scepter of whose Opinion the Lord Bacon seems to be thought he had the Title of Conquest the which he might and did make use of as far as he saw convenient Although he brought over with him but two thousand Mercenaries a small Force in comparison of those that the Prince brought over with him and got the Crown almost purely by the help of King Richard's Subjects and by the Treachery of his pretended Friends many of which had been preferred by him and yet forfook him I grant indeed that King Richard was an Usurper and a cruel Prince But what of that Although his being so was a just reason why Henry who had been conveyed into Britain in the Reign of King Edward the 4th and never returned into England until that fortunate Expedition which made him King and consequently who had never sworn Allegiance to him might agree to marry the undoubted Heiress of the House of York and thereupon do his utmost to deprive him of his Crown yet did it not make the Success against him either more or less a Conquest It made it lawful to conquer him but it did not make the Victory ever the more a Conquest And further whatever Weight there is in that is likewise in the Title of their present Majesties For as Henry the 7th had a just Quarrel against Richard the 3d so also had their present Majesties against King James the 2d It is true in both these Instances there is a Mistake under which the Lord Bacon himself seems to lie in the Case of Henry the 7th viz. That the Victors are thought to have gained not only a Title to the Crown against the Vanquished Princes but also an Absolute Power over the Rights and Liberties of the Subject Whereas in these and all other such like Cases where the Nation stands Neuter no Man is conquered but the King and such as assisted him and therefore no Right is gained over the Laws or the Peoples Liberties But of this more hereafter At the present it is enough to observe that these two Instances make it plain to be the Opinion of those Times that to the Right or Title of Conquest it is not necessary that the Souldiers and Subjects of the Prince Conquered proved faithful to him it is enough that he be either slain or which I hope I shall prove to be all one rendred unable any longer to defend his Subjects and his Crown against the Victor And is it not likewise the general Opinion of these present Times Do not the Christian Princes now in a State of War with each other endeavour each to draw Assistance from his Enemies by Manifesto's Declarations Memorials And do not Souldiers daily desert one Prince whose natural Subjects
they are and run to another But is that thought a Reason why the Victors should quit any thing that their Swords do gain If their Declarations be untrue or in any respect unreasonable there is Sin in that and in making any Advantage of them but the Prince's was not and therefore as there was no Evil in it so is there no reason why he should quit any Advantage gained by it 2. But it may be said That the Nation was not conquered nor was it possible it should be by such a small number of Forces as the Prince brought over with him And that no Right of Conquest could accrue to the Prince so long as the King had Subjects enow able to have defended him Had the Nation done its utmost in defence of the King and yet been overpowred the Assertion had been true but it was so far from it that it was the Poisoned Nation K. James feared more than the Foreign Army A great part of the Nation took against the King and almost all the rest looked on while he was driven out of his Dominions And call you this a Conquest To this I reply 1. That this was much-what the Case in the two Instances I have given and yet as has been shewn it was the Opinion of those Times that the two Princes I have mentioned were conquered 2. As to the Nation 's standing Neuter or taking against the King I have considered it already and need not now repeat This Objection is much-what the same with the former only it appears in a different Dress 3. As to the Prince's conquering England I say he never pretended to it nor could he have done it justly for he had no Quarrel against the Nation It was so far from it that he never pretended any His Quarrel against the King was likewise the Nation 's Complaint against him and at the same time he asserted his own Right and in that very Particular he asserted the Right of the Nation For as he had a Right to be satisfied about the Succession so also had the Nation and the Nation too desired Satisfaction as well as he Nay he came not only to assert his own Right jointly with ours in this Particular but even all our Rights and Liberties which were struck at and in great danger of being utterly subverted So that this Glorious Prince was so far from being our Enemy that he was our Champion and Deliverer He conquered nothing but our Hearts And if he never pretended to be our Enemy he could not be said to conquer us Had he conquered the Nation he would have had a Right to somewhat else besides the Crown viz. to our Laws Liberties and Estates and we should have been in a very ill Condition until by submitting all to the Convention and suffering the Government to settle upon the Antient Basis he gave us all back again It is true many times the Quarrel of Prince and People are twisted together and then they stand or fall together but here they were severed and therefore the King fell by himself And although it be a hard Saying yet is it too true that his Fall was his Countrey 's Rise The Nation was never conquered since the Days of William the First supposing that may be called such a Conquest Nor is such a Conquest necessary to give the Victorious Prince a Right to the Throne of the Vanquished Enough it is that he be reduced to such a Condition as to be unable to help his Friends and they to help him Such a Conquest was that of Henry the 4th over Richard the 2d although he thought not to have made use of that Title because his Quarrel was not just nor his Success gained without Dissimulation and Perjury And such a Conquest was that of Henry the 7th over Richard the 3d. And yet both these as I have said thought they had good Titles as being Conquerors And such a Conquest was this of our present Soveraigns over King James the 2d 3. It may be said All this would be true were King James out of all possibility of ever helping his Friends or of receiving Help from them But he is only retired into a Neighbouring Kingdom And there he is within Call whenever the Nation 's Eyes shall be opened He only waits for a fair Opportunity of returning to succour his Friends and right himself To this I answer 1. King James is in such a Kingdom as we can expect no Good from and if ever he returns out of it we have reason to think he will succour no Friends but those of his own Religion and such as are for Arbitrary Power But as for all the rest which are the main Body of the Community we have great cause to fear they will be in a much worse Condition than they are under the present Government It is highly probable that he went away with hopes that the Distractions he took care to throw us into and our own mistaken Notions of Loyalty with the Assistance of the French King would in a short time bring him back a Conqueror upon the Necks of our Laws and our Religion And what Encouragment can a wise Protestant find in this to be undone by suspending his Allegiance to our present most gracious Soveraigns Shall we for the present make our selves miserable and do our utmost to make the Nation so too in hopes that e're long he will return and be in a Condition to make both us and it more effectually so But 2. It is not essential to a Conquest nor to the Right it gives that the Prince supposed to be conquered be out of all possibility of ever helping his Friends or of receiving Help from them No Prince is in such a Condition while he lives It is sufficient that the main Body of a Kingdom have submitted to the Conqueror and the greatest Part of such as have been required to fwear Allegiance to him have done it so as that he is fully possessed of the Government and that the vanquished Prince is not able to protect those that refuse to submit to him but that they may be ruined before he could come in to their Assistance and would be so were it not for the meer Mercy of the Conqueror For one great Reason why Conquest in a just Quarrel gives the Subject a rightful Liberty of transferring his Allegiance to the Conqueror is Because his former Soveraign is by his own Fault fallen into such a Condition as that he cannot to him answer the Ends of Government nor he to his Soveraign the Ends of Allegiance and Subjection And as it would be very hard that a King should be obliged to throw away himself for the sake of his Subjects when his doing so would not in the least advantage them so is it no less hard that Subjects should be obliged to throw away themselves for the sake of their King when their doing of it will not at all advantage him