Battery more I remember my Lord Russel was mightily pleased with the Courage of the Citizens at that time and particularly of Alderman Cornish who slighted these Preparations against them by saying they might indeed do some Dammage to some of their Chimneys I need not mention the Intended Cittadel of Chelsey-College to straiten the City on that Side nor their greatest Cittadel of Westminster-Hall where they had perverted all Law and plainly put a stop to it by dismissing a Grand Jury before their time At the Notorious Case of Fitz Harris my Lord was present for which Serjeant Pemberton can give the best Reasons because he reserved them at that time and no doubt they are improved by this and brought up a Fashion which we do not find in the Year-Books for Judges to give no Reasons for their Judgments As to the Case of the City Charter it was so very plain that I desired Sir George Treby now Lord Chief Justice who was to argue for it to use only this short Argument to carry Magna Charta in one Hand and a Penknife in the other and to desire the Court to cut out the Chapter of Magna Charta where the Rights of the City of London and the other Vills and Burghs and Cinque-Ports are confirmed and when their hand was in to make but one Business of it and to cut out all the rest I am sure the City of London will give me leave to say that they and their Chamber which was the best Fund in England was at that time broke and when it will be repaired I know not but they may easily know whom to sue for Dilapidations and in what High Court that ought to be done And the ready way is to Extend the Estates of all those that treacherously destroyed that City and made it the finest Village in Europe and saluted the King King of London as if he had not been compleat King of it till it was Ruin'd I need not mention their Standing Guards in time of Peace of which the Parliament-men used to say There go our Masters and so they had reason after Sir Iohn Coventry's usage and which all the great Lawyers of England declared to be Illegal from the first and such a Force upon the Nation as the Law abhors The Lord Chief Justice Vaughan had the Honesty and Courage to tell my late Lord Macclesfield so though he then Commanded and was at the Head of them My Lord very honourably remembered this as an Instance of that Great Man's Integrity And who that ever had the Honour of knowing the last Great Man can ever forget His But the Guards became more Formidable afterwards when an Undertaker offered with a Thousand of their Horse of which they had always more to go and conquer the City of London in a contemptuous manner and when with their Detachements and filling up again with new Men they could at any time Form an Army They had likewise their Nursery of Tangier within call and when they saw their time it came over Ever since the last Sentence that passed upon me I am somewhat out of conceit with the Name of Guards For having made as Honest an Address to the Army as the World can shew any thing and being run down for it as a High Misdemeanour I took my Exceptions to the Information amongst other things that there was no averrment of any Army in it and I said there could be no such thing because it was Contrary to the Law of England Whereupon both the Attorney General Sawyer and the Court of King's-Bench said that the Camp at Hownslow-Heath was not an Army but only the King's Guards I replied that I thought they were too far off for Guards and too great a Number To which the Lord Chief Justice Herbert answered that the King wanted a Greater Number to Defend him from my Papers At which I could only smile to see a Rag or two of the Press made a Pretence to keep up a Great Army But as I intimated before Guards shall be an Army and an Army shall be Guards when such Men think fit Aristotle in his Politicks is very severe upon Guards and says That it is the Mark of a King 's turning Tyrant if he require a Guard and says further that if a King demand a Guard to defend him against his People his People ought to demand a Guard to defend them against him And it is very plain that the Additional Guards of Horse and Foot in the two last Reigns for there were never any before but the Band of Pensioners and the Band of Archers now Yeomen who were the Antient Establishment for the Preservation of the King's Person were not intended for the King's Preservation for that was done to their hand but to awe the Nation to animate Judges in false Judgments and to back Officers in illegal Proceedings for where the Law would not hold out in the way of a Legal Writ it was as well supplied by an Arbitrary Command and two or three Files of Musketteers I will name but one thing more which was Occasioned by the Bill of Exclusion That Bill was carried Nemine Contradicente several times in the House of Commons but when it came in the Westminster Parliament to be carried up by my Lord Russell to the House of Lords it was so ill received there â—hat the Bishops were for throwing it out to rights However after a Reading and after a Debate which lasted till about Midnight it was thrown out That Learned Nobleman the Great Earl of Essex was pleased to tell me what Arguments he insisted upon in that Debate The first was that the Regality of England was an Office concerning which the 17 th Chapter of King Edward the Confessor's Laws is wholly spent and it is so Declared to be in Many Acts of Parliament as low as Queen Mary's Time and that a Woman as well as a Man might be invested with the Regal Office Hereupon he said that a Person Unqualified as all the World knew the Duke of York was could not be admitted to that Office Upon discourse about this I remember his Lordship was pleased to take down Lambert's Saxon Laws and shew me several Particulars in that 17 th Chapter which I had forgot His second Argument was to prove that if the Duke of York had Unqualified himself for that High Office as he plainly had for the meanest Office in England then the Parliament had undoubtedly Power to foreclose him and set aside his Remainder in the Crown because they had Power to do more This he said was the known Law of England and agreed upon by the Lord Chancellor More and Richard Rich then Sollicitor General and afterwardsâ— Lord Rich as a First established Principle upon which they argued about the Supremacy It stands thus in the Record as we have it p. 421. of the Lord Herbert's History The Sollicitor Demanded if it were enacted by Parliament that Richard Rich should be King and
that it should be Treason for any Man to deny it What Offence it were to contravene this Act Sir Thomas More answered that he should offend if he said No because he was Bound by the Act but that this was Casus levis Whereupon Sir Thomas More said he would propose a higher Case suppose by Parliament it were enacted quod Deus non sit Deus and that it were Treason to contravene whether it were an Offence to say according to the said Act Richard Rich replied yea but said withal I will propose a middle Case because yours is too high The King you know is constitute Supream Head of the Church on Earth why should not you Master More accept him so as you would me if I were made King by the Supposition aforesaid Sir Thomas More Answer'd the Case was not the same because said he a Parliament can make a King and Depose him and that every Parliament-man may give his Consent thereunto but that a Subject cannot be bound so in the Case of Supremacy Quia Consensum ab eo ad Parlamentum praebere non potest Et quanquam Rex sic acceptus sit in Anglia plurimae tamen partes exterae idem non affirmant Because the Parliament-man cannot carry the Subject's Consent to Parliament in this Case that is to say no body but Christ could make his own Vicar and the Head in Heaven make the Head on Earth and although the King be held to be Head of the Church here in England yet the greatest part of the World abroad are of another mind Here Sir Thomas More stuck for I believe stick He did because he laid down his Life for it but you see that the undoubted unquestioned Law of the Land was this That a Parliament can make and Depose a King for it is the Foundation of their Arguing And it cannot be thought that a Learned Lord Chancellor and Sollicitor General should be both Ignorant in the First Principles of the Law Neither would Richard Rich have been made a Lord and the Head of a Noble Family of Earls if it had not been Current Law in those Days for such a Principle upon Record would have been as bad and hurt his Preferment as much as if he had been Stigmatized And therefore my Lord of Essex's Argument was more than Measure That if a Parliament could make and Depose a King and make Richard Rich King much more they might foreclose the Duke of York who was no King and more unqualified than Richard Rich and might make the Prince of Orange King an otherghess Man than Richard Rich. Thus that Great Man Argued but Care was taken that he should Argue for the Good of his Countrey no more and therefore we that are left behind partly to bewail the loss of such Great Men and partly to imitate them ought to uphold their Cause and as mean a Man as I am able to maintain these plain Truths against all the World Though indeed my Lord of Essex told me that his Adversaries in that Debate waved the Jargon of Divine Right and the Line of Succesâ—ion which had been inculcated in the Second Volume of the History of the Reformation and by the Heroe himself to whom it was Dedicated and at that time they betook themselves chiefly to Reasons of State They were got at the old Scarecrow Venient Romani the Foreign Catholick Princes would espouse the Duke of York's Quarrel the Ancient Kingdom of Scotland would admit him for Their King in opposition to our Act of Parliament and this would entail a Dangerous War upon the Nation That is I suppose the Navy Royal of Scotland would have given Law to the English Fleet They were likewise doubtful of Ireland and if these two Kingdoms were dismembred from us the solitary Kingdom of England would not make that Figure in the World as it used to do And therefore according to the Method of all hired Politicks they must make sure of sinking Three Kingdoms for fear of losing Two and Deliver up the Castle for fear the Suburbs should Revolt With such fitting Arguments was that Cause supported and if I have broke any Rules in repeating that Great Man's private Discourse now it is done I cannot help it But I say let his Integrity be known and speak as Loud as his Blood cries And I am sure they that would stifle that Man's Honour would stifle his Death But the Bill of Exclusion is of no Concernment at this Time though if we had then ventured our Lives for it we had done well and it had been good Husbandry for it had saved more than an Hundred Thousand Lives since which are all of a price and as dear to them as owned them as ours are to us I grant a True Statesman is of another Opinion and values being called his Grace or Noble Marquess more than a Million of Lives provided that in such a general Destruction he can but save one And to confirm themselves in their ill-gotten Honours they generally hatch Plots suborn Rebellions or any thing that they think may create Business keep themselves from being Questioned and thin Mankind whereby they lose so many of their Enemies which by their Oppression they have heaped up to themselves So I have been told a certain Person being asked why he Destroyed my Lord Russell said it was Self-preservation he did it in his own Defence because my Lord Russell would have Destroyed him A fit Answer for the Answerer because it is just the Excuse of a Highway-man who adds Murder to his Robbery and Wrong because otherwise the True-man might have pursued him and Hanged him for it But the Masterpiece of their Policy they have stoln from the Old Popes of Rome to send their Princes into the Holy Wars while they domineer'd and plaid their own Game at home I express'd my Fears as soon as he was Crown'd that our King would be so serv'd and that taking advantage of his Matchless Courage they would put him upon hazardous Expeditions for such Counsels are on Nature's Side and are soon hearkned to by a Cordelyon or an Edward the First who were all on fire for Crusadoes And it was easy to tell what Advices the Statesmen would give such to be sure as agreed with His Inclinations but were much more for their own Interest for if a Man but look into the Tyring-room and see the old Actors he knows what the Play will be without a Bill It is the Observation of the Learned Antiquary Selden that our Nation got nothing by those fruitless Voyages into the Holy Land after a vast Expence of Blood and Treasure but only the Sign of the Saracen's Head For after our People came home again worsted and with great loss they had no other way to save their Credit but to represent the Saracens as Giants and to picture them with Eyes like Saucers and a Mouth big enough to eat a Man And it is well if the English bring home any
Parliament without which he had no more Right to them than the Prince of Wales now has In the mean time the Pulpits were the Ensurers of the King's Word and said it was like the Laws of the Mâ—des and Persians which Altered not And as for the Customs they Preached that he had a Natural Right to them for they had gotten the true Art of spelling all the Oppressions and Devildoms in the World out of the pregnant word King though it is impossible to fetch any more Power out of that word than just what the People of England have put into it What I write is in the Memory of Man It is true in Sweden the word King now of late signifies infinite Power in Denmark since the Force put upon the Senate it is Proclamation-Law in King Ioseph's Kingdom of Hungary it is doing of Justice in general or according to his young Discretion in France it is Will and Pleasure because it is and it is the Mouth-watering General Excise Standing Armies Levying Money All things This makes him a Powerful and a Formidable Enemy but it would be more formidable to have those Outlandish things come hither though it were to make another as Powerful Monarch here as the late Licensed Book of the State of England would fain have it I take it to be a Licensed Book because it was Published in the Gazetâ—e But I tell that Author it is impossible to have here in England such a brave thing as the French King is till we be first made such sorry things as the French Subjects are I have not forgot where I digressed and I say that by Experience Popish Tyranny is so far better than Protestant that Pâ—ople are more aware of it and sooner rid their hands of it We saw this so plainly in Powis-house that nothing more can be writ upon the Subject A Massâ—house devoted to Destruction was saved by the Inscription of my Lord Delamere's Name that it was provided for his Lodging But a Protestant Inscription will never save a Mass-house a second time I might descant upon his Calling in Providence to decide a Title which is to employ the Majesty of Heaven in Undersheriffry and the Woes he lays upon Non-swearers and their Fighting against God if they happen to be in the Wrong as I will swear they are But I will keep my Word because as I said he seems to recal his first Paragraph in his Second which begins in these following words But all this may look like a Pathetical aggravating the Matter unless it should appear to be well supported I go therefore in the next place to set before you those Reasons that seem convincing to me even though there were no more to be said for the present Settlement but that we have a Throne filled and a King and Queen in Possession From henceâ—orth therefore Rhetorick apart we must expect nothing but Reasons and convincing Reasons I shall take the pains of examining them one by one and find out if I can their Power of Conviction which I am afraid is like an Estate left in Diego's Will The First Reason which seems Convincing to him and sufficient for the Purpose is that we have a Throne filled and a King and Queen in Possession A Throne filled I think it is for it never yet held more than one Person at a time unless it were widened once in a Thousand Years by the Consent of the People I believe that a King and Queen in Possession at once or a King and Queen de Facto Together in Opposition to de Iure which the Scotch Parliament justly called a Villanous Distinction would have frighted even Coke himself the first Author that I know of that affected Distinction and much more would have frighted old Littleton out of whose Mouth there never came any thing else but Ung Dieu Ung Roy. We know a King alone comes from Heaven or a Queen alone comes from Heaven and either of them Fills a Iure-Divino Throne But to talk of Two in Possession together without first naming the true Cause of it which was the Good-will of the People who were perfectly free to have had either or neither or both is to talk of an utter Impossibility For here all their Schemes fail them all their Texts fail them and they cannot shew any such Pattern in the Mount Besides Possession even of a single Person is the worst Title in the World it is the Claim of a Disseysor an Intruder an Usurper and of Oliver who told the Fifth-Monarchy Man that he only kept Possession of the Throne till King Iesus came and then he was ready to Resign it to him The Pastoral seems to be aware of this and therefore immediately these words follow in the same Paragraph The bringing the State of the Question so low may seem at first view not to be of so much Advantage to Their Majesties Title but since I intend to carry the Matter further before I leave it I hope it may be no incongruous Method to begin at that which will take in the greatest Numbers since there is no Dispute in this that they are actually in Possession of the Throne that they protect us and that we by living under their Protection and enjoying the Benefit of it are therefore bound to make some Returns to them for it In my Life I never met with such a short-winded Author for he is perpetually sucking in his Breath and what he advances in the beginning of a Paragraph is presently recalled A Throne filled and a King and Queen in Possession was in his very last Period a Convincing Argument for this Settlement yea though nothing more were to be said for it whereby it was made such a self-sufficient Convincing Argument as rendred all others superfluous and needless And yet now in this Period he Blemishes his own convincing and self-sufficient Argument as if it might lower and disparage their Majesties Title and plainly confesses it to be purely Drag-net as that which will take in the greatest Numbers One Convincing Argument is as much as one Thousand and as the King has but one Plain Title which is the Gift of the People so there is but one plain Proof of it which is the Instrument of Conveyance of the Crown by both Houses which the King accepting of Confirmed the Thing For that is very true the King might have chose whether he would be King or no he could not be made so against his Will nor can any Man be forced to take a Trust. But after all this had passed in the Face of the Sun and been transacted by the Greatest Authority upon Earth I mean the English Community which as King Charles the First says Moulded this Government and made it what it is and consequently both at first erected the Office of a King and always disposed of the Crown as they found Cause and never did it upon more valuable Considerations than in their last just Choice I say
Positions of the Dispensing Power And when that was done I publickly Challenged them for giving me no Relief from my duress and barbarous Usage They had the Grace to tell me that my Motion was to go abroad to Counsel which I knew to be Impossible as well as they being in Execution I said that my Motion I was suâ—e was Right being drawn up by my own Hand and several Gentlemen at the Bar generously attested that my Counsel who was then not in Court had Moved right But I will say no more of those Judges for considering the great number of Brave and Honest Men which they have Hanged in their Time when it comes to their own Turn they will but Prophane a Gallows Out of this long and impertinent Story I put this short Case It was certainly Lawful for me to submit to this Usage when I could not help it but I had deserved to die the Death of a Dog and had betrayed the Rights of an English-Man if I had entred into Engagements to abide by it I will give him a third Instance At the Parliament at Oxford in 65 when they made the Five Mile Act there was the same Enslaving Project on foot as there was afterwards in Seventy odd to Swear to the Government in Church and State without Alteration The Wise Lord Treasurer Southampton was against it and said that though he liked Episcopacy yet he would not be Sworn to it because he might hereafter be of another Opinion And perhaps he had been further off from that Oath if he had lived till now The Remainder of this third Paragraph follows in these words And as it appears that there lies no just Objection to the swearing Obedience so there arises none from â— of his Subjects I am sure he cannot tell what Fee As if the King were Landlord of all England 4 thly He makes a King in Fact to be Lord of the Fee as if English-men did not know their True Landlord from Iohn a Green 5 thly He would have People swear an Obedience according to Law in opposition to a Blind and Absolute Obedience though they are still to retain their Passive Obedience which is certainly Blind and Absolute Obedience or else there is no such thing in the World I shall slightly touch upon each of these in their Order First of all he out-runs the Constable in taking for granted an Oath of Obedience where he has neither proved bare Obedience much less a Promise of Obedience onwards to be due for which I refer my self to what passed on the former part of the Paragraph It is true indeed what a Right Reverend Preacher said That Possession is Eleven Points of the Law But where is the Twelfth We want the Point of Right without which the Eleven Points of Law are like the Verdict of Eleven Jury-men for receiving of which King Alfred heretofore hanged one of his Judges Secondly He here gives us a Notion of Allegiance by the halves for he says It is in its Original Signification nothing but the Service due to the Chief Lord of the Fee What nothing more Yes it was always likewise the Duty which the Liege-Lord owed to his Liege-man Allegiance and Fealty were always Reciprocal And therefore he need not say so sparingly p. 24. that an Original Contract was implied in it for it was an Express Contract Allegiance was always a Mutual Bond and a Duty that was promised interchangeably It was so when Canutus and the English swore Fealty to one another at Southampton Brompton p. 903. l. 57. It was a true Bargain upon Articles treated of and agreed upon before hand Ut me teneat says the Liege-man in his Oath sicut deservire volo totum mihi compleat quod in nostrâ praelocutione fuit quando suus deveni ejus elegi voluntatem Thirdly He makes the King Lord of the Fee to intitle him to our Oath of Allegiance It is nothing so for the People of England do not hold of the King what Holy Church does I know not they may be his Vassals for ought I know I am sure I am none Our Allegiance stands upon truer and surer Grounds The King of England is Invested with the Regal Office of Governing a Free-born People This High Office and Dominion was given him by Law and all his Powers which are very Great and give him an Opportunity of doing a world of Good are all stated by Law for else how should we know they are his and they are butted and bounded by Law or else they might be pretended to be Infinite We find it thus in the first Constitution of this Monarchy in the beginning of the Mirror and thus the Office of the King stands delineated in the 17 th Chapter of Edward the Confessor's Laws where by the by we find that King Iames Forfeited and ceased to be a King Our King has the most Glorious Crown this Day in Christendom for it has not that dark Side of Impotency which by some is falsly called the Power of doing Wrong This Crown at the time of his Coronation he used to be Adjured not to meddle with unless he would observe his Coronation Oath bonâ Fide sine malo Ingenio It is a Righteous Oath and wonderfully for the Benefit of this Great People and when he has done this he has a Legal Right as well as a Conscionable to the Oaths of all his People For if his Subjects will not swear to Him let us give the King his Oath again It is true Sworn or Unsworn both Prince and People are upon the Terms of the Government which is a Stable thing and not like Cannon to be new Cast only to put the present Prince's Arms upon it But still I say for the Prince to be Sworn and the People not is like a Marriage on One side as if the other Party were to be at a loose end and left to discretion I am clearly for the old Law of Swearing every one above Sixteen at the Court-Leet and not suffering any one that sets foot upon English Ground to be Unsworn above Nuarante jours which is the Ancient Common Law And he that will not take the Oath ought to be treated as an Outlaw for he ought not to live under a Government who refuses to give it the Customary and Legal Caution If they dote upon King Iames's unextinguishable Right they would do better to be at St. Germains than here for if I had a Rightful injured Prince abroad my Sense of Allegiance would prompt me to follow him to the World's End Fourthly He makes a King in Fact to be Lord of the Fee We have been too long haunted with this word Fact and therefore I will try to lay the Goblin Either a King is a Rightful King or he is not if he be write him down so but never call him Fact that is Wrongful King Usurper Pretender Tyrant in Title Idol Counterfeit King No King For he that pretends to
of our Laws is no Allegiance it makes our Circumcision to become Uncircumcision What is Impracticable is Void as those great Souls saw of whom the World was not Worthy who would have set aside the Duke of York in time and not have suffered him to play his Rex which they knew was a Contradiction to this Government A Traytor King a Protecting Destroyer and a Wolf Shepherd they knew were things not of a Piece and Irreconcileable And therefore all Honest Men were for being rid of King Iames long before and they were in the Right It was not such a puiny thing as the after-clap of a Prince of Wales which made them part with him For though the laboured Discovery of that Fraud would have done great Service to this Government and ought not to have been spoiled by being put into a strong Box and let out again to disadvantage yet we must have more than a Supposititious Child to Justify this Revolution For you must stop there you may indeed set aside the Changeling but that does not extend to Out the Father who was Tenant for Life because perhaps his Wife went fourty Weeks with a Cushion In short knowing that King Iames was a Contradiction to the Government and had rendred our Allegiance Impossible we parted with him upon Reasons that were Primitive and Coaeval with the Government but as for those that do not allow that he Forfeited and yet would not Assist him against an Invasion as he Proclaimed it and as for his Mercenaries that Revolted from him and pick'd his Pocket what Reasons they had I know not If he Deserted he was forced to Desert for the very Ground he stood upon fell from under him as I told more than Fourty People it would be so before ever the Prince of Orange embarqued and because I loved my Country was mightily pleased that it would be a brave Dry Dutch War without any Bloodshed And therefore as for those that forced away Iames the Just when according to them he had made no Forfeiture either by their Resistance of him or by their Non-assistance They must never plead his Desertion in discharge of their Allegiance for that is to make their Crime their Plea and to take Advantage of their own Fault which neither Law nor Reason will ever admit So much for Desertion now for Conquest which is become a very Great modern Point And here we meet with new and unheard-of Conquests of a King Conquered and not one of his Subjects For so all the Conquering Bishops now pull in their Horns and say that they meant that King Iames alone was Conquered and not the Nation That is a cleaverer Tip in my Opinion than taking out the Middle Pin and throwing down none of the rest But let us see now what Earnings they will make of their Ten-pin tip their Solitary Captive King Iames. If the Prince of Orange did Conquer King Iames in a Just War why then he was his Prisoner of War and he might sell Him and his wearing Clothes Or because as another Bishop says The Rights of War are the same here as they are abroad he might have put him to Fine and Ransom as the French King did the Duke of Wirtemberg or as Teckely did General Heusâ—er But what does this Intitle him to further Not a Farthing of the Revenue for that is Publick Money not a Jewel of the Crown for that is the Goods of the Kingdom much less to a Dram of Allegiance for that is wholly a new Score And yet this Conquest is continually alledged both in and out of the Pulpit as a Motive for Swearing as if it were the chief Ingredient in our Allegiance to this Government There is nothing at all gained by Conquering King Iames's Person for he did not carry the Government of England about him If he had been willing and so disposed he could not have Resigned the Government to the Prince of Orange for the Parliament in Edward the First 's time declared King Iohn's Resignation of this Kingdom to the Pope to be Absolutely Void because it was done sans leur Assent the Parliament's Consent was not had to it And on the other hand the ruining and spoiling an Old King does not make a New one For that is but a Tartar's Conceit that if he destroy a Wise or Handsom Man he shall forthwith inherit his Wisdom or Beauty But how came King Iames to be so abandoned as to be singled out and Conquered by himself We that knew he ceased to be a King or perhaps of Right never was one can give a fair Account of this Matter But where were his Lieges all this while that held him for their Natural Lord and by Divine Right and yet failed him They that thought their Allegiance intire and not Dissolved by King Iames himself ought by Law to have Defended him Conâ—ra omnes homines Vivos Mortuos against all Men both Alive and Dead So that if old Schomberg should chance to walk for ought I know by Virtue of their Allegiance they are bound to fight his Ghost This is a Consideration which belongs to the Conquering Bishops and their Inferiour Clergy and I leave it amongst them So much for this new-fashioned Partial Conquest of a King Conquered and his People Untouch'd But I have known by long Experience that to serve a present Turn these Men have an excellent Faculty at newly devised Fables I believe it was never heard of from the beginning of the World that any one who was owned to be their Rightful King was ever Conquered and his People not but instead of that They look'd on Such a Kingdom belongs to some other World and not to this for in this World as our Saviour said their Subjects and Servants would Fight for them This is the new Separate Interest as if a King were not so much as Knight of the Shire or as if the County were no way Concerned in their Representative As I said before I set aside this Partial Conquest and come to that which is a True Conquest and will examine whether that Dissolves Allegiance Suppose a King and his People who are all of a Piece till either of them break Faith with the other are both run down and fall under the Chance of War It is no matter which of them is in the Conqueror's hands because they are all as one If their King have that hard Fate they must either Rescue or Ransome him though their private Money and their Church-Plate go for it And if any of his People fall into the Enemies hands He must do the same by them If neither of them can do this but they are overpowred and unable the next thing is to Advise the Party that is in the Briars to make the best Terms they can Redime te Captum quam queas minimo This is a Duty on both sides and where this Advice cannot be express'd it is always implied and justly presumed But how then does
Conquest Dissolve Allegiance when it is plainly the Agreement of the Parties themselves which sets them Free from one another But the last part of this Paragraph is Oracle and therefore we ought to hear it with great Attention Now all the true Maxims of Government being such that they must tend to the Preservation and not to the Ruin of Mankind it is certain that all those are false which tend to the inevitable Destruction of Cities and Societies and therefore this of an indiffeasable Allegiance must be reckoned among these since the fatal Consequences that must attend upon it are evident and this is the Opinion in which all who have considered this Matter either as Lawyers or Casuists do agree I have ever had a great aversion to all Maxims of Government true or false for there always lies lurking this Deceit in Generals and Universals that though they be True for the most part yet they are conceived in Terms large enough to be falsly applied and then they become False and are Usually the Tools that Dishonest Men go to work with And I never saw a Man deal in Transcendental Politicks which are over our Heads and avoid coming down to Particulars and to the Point but with a Purpose to Deceive This of mine is likewise General Talk and therefore I must come to Instances Salus Populi Suprema Lex esto Let the Safety of the People take place of all Laws was the old Roman Law and a celebrated Maxim of State ever since But because in Monarchies the Interest of a Prince drowns that of inferiour People and the Life of my Lord the King is worth ten Thousand of Theirs I have seen this Maxim by no less a Casuist than Bishop Sanderson made free of the Court in such a manner as has made a Ricketty Head and the Destruction of a great part of the People would still have been Salus Populi Though I expected no better fâ—om such a Casuist who makes Six in the Hundred Sabbath-breaking and every one that takes lawful Interest for his Money to be guilty of the Breach of all the Ten Commandments and particularly of the Fourth because his Plough goes on Sundays Necessity has no Law is another Maxim but it is pity there is not Law for it for it has always been on the Court Side and never on the Countrey 's though one would think the Maxim lay equally betwixt them both but the truth of it is they either are or should be all one In the beginning of King Charles the First 's Reign it was loudly complained of in Parliament that Necessity was an Armed Man and an Evil Counsellor and indeed it had done much Mischief then but not so much as the L. C. J. Bank's Maxim did afterwards That there was a Rule of Law and a Rule of Government and the Rule of Law must knock under and give way to the Rule of Government Yes it was that Rule of Mis-Rule that Confounded these Nations and was the Death of many Hundred Thousands of brave Mâ—n who were not so easily rear'd And in the late King Iames's time Necessity return'd again and cancelled all our Laws and was the chief Ingredient in the Dispensing Power Yet after all I must acknowledg that a real and not pretended Necessity is Superiour to all Law For Unforeseen Cases may happen and such as admit of no delay wherein the Lawgivers themselves would have made their Laws quite otherwise though this can seldom be where there are to be Anniversary Parliaments and Parliaments always within call But then all Men must act very honestly in such Cases and so as to acquit themselves to their Countrey for to them they must Answer it who are competent Judges of so plain a thing as Necessity is For I believe the refined Statesmen themselves cannot but say that Common People have Common Sense Whereas to say that the King is sole Judge of Necessity as our false Judges did in the last Reign is to bring us back to Richard the Second's Maxim That the Law of England was in his Breast and in his Mouth Another Maxim which was to have Converted my Lord Russell and to have saved his Soul in the Letter which in a new way was brought by the Sender was this That in Case our Religion and Rights were Invaded it was unlawful to defend them Because the Government and Peace of Humane Society could not well subsist upon these Terms I have been assailed with this Maxim and it has been quoted upon me several times even in this Reign and therefore I shall answer it I ever took it for granted that Government ceases and is lost when all the Ends of Government are Destroyed as they plainly are where the Religion and Rights of a Kingdom are Invaded for the more surety and security of which Rights Men at the first entred into Society I speak the Language of Fortesâ—ue Who then in this Case is the Friend to Government and would have it live He that Invades or He that stops such Destructive Invasion Again who is it that breaks the Peace of Humane Society He that Invades all that Mankind have or they that are only willing to Defend their own I in my Simplicity thought that the breach of the Peace had been with the Trespasser And I thought likewise that by the Law of England I might justify the beating of any Man that would take away my Goods and that in so doing I should not break the Peace neither would the Law impute it to me but to the Invader These were my former Thoughts but we must now learn a new Lesson For it seems the way to preserve Government is to see it Destroyed and to let Tyranny alone and to suffer Invasion to go on for otherwise though the Peace be already broken to pieces you disturb the Peace But if it were not lawful to advance Paradoxes and Contradictions to Common Sense how could Men shew their Learning or wherein would they differ from other Men As for this Maxim it is exactly calculated for the use of a Perverted Government or of an Insolent Hedg-Constable that beats a quiet and orderly Person for the Conservation of the Peace and knocks him down to bid him stand But to come closer to the Point Is not the Invasion of the Religion and Rights of a People the highest Tyranny that can be conceived And how then came the English Divinity to be such a Pimp to Tyranny and to be so deeply concerned for the Subsistence and Continuance of it without molestation as to Damn all Men who would not undergo a severe Repentance for being of another Opinion and to urge them to Recant their English Principles upon the very Scaâ—fold Though I think that to be a much more Proper place for retractingâ— Destructive Errors than Deliverance-Truths But I can tell all the World how this came to pass for one Day teaches and certifies another and things are cleared up in time which were
Ostracisms in Greece and even Cartes himself was used like a Skellum in Holland but those were Legal Banishments and according to the Custom of the Country whereas that Earl's Usage was never known to any Civilized part of the World For having his Papers plundered to find Matter against him which my Lord Anglesey though he was one of the Committee of Council appointed to overlook those Papers acknowledged to Mr. Charleton and me was a very illegal Practice and abominable foul Play even while he himself was employed about it amongst his Papers they found a naked Draught of an Association which as I said before was a thing so much above-board that it was Ordered by the House of Lords themselves This Paper which signified nothing when it was accumulated with their Irish Evidence at the Old Baily was not to be lost but was afterwards set up by it self for a Countrey Quintin to be thrown at by all the Loyal Sparks of the Nation where they were to get Garlands for knocking it down For those were the Men whom the King delighted to Honour and it was an assured Knighthood to the Foreman of an Abhorrence if not to several of his Fellows And if the Knights of England were to be surveyed I believe the Knights of the Address and of the Abhoâ—rence of Associations would be found to be the largest Order but I dare say would have been the thinnest if they were to have been Created Bannerets But the rotten part of the Law belonging to the Middle-Temple who were in haste for Preferment the Saunderses and the Shoreses and I care not who were forward to pleasure the Court in this Matter and began the Yelp from an Inns of Court which was thought Authentick in the Countrey and so all the Curs in England from the Foreland of Kent to St. Michael's Mount set up a full-mouth'd Cry against that Earl I refer my self to the Infamous Gazetts of the Year 82. Which were remarkable upon this account that they were often a whole Sheeâ— being swoln with Abhorrences Now I desire any Noble Earl in England to lay his Hand upon his Heart and consider whether he would be content to be so serv'd and to be baited twice a Week with Abhorrers in Sir Lionel Ienkins's Bear-Garden for the best part of a Twelvemonth together and at last be forced with downright worrying to steal out of England and go and die in a Ditch After this no Man could call his Countrey his own for the Character of my Lord Shaftsbury which they had endeavoured to render hateful with the same ease might have been stuck upon another for the Kingdom of Poland being Elective it lay in the Breast of the Court to choose whom they pleased King of Poland If when my Lord Shaftsbury was forced to leave his own House and had secreted himself at Mr. Watson's he talk'd with Howard of Escreck about relieving himself and his Countrey he did amiss and it was a defect for talk is but talk when all 's done Now my Lord Russel was an Eye-witness to this long Scene of Invasion of Rights and his Foresight was much earlier witness a Letter of his of an old Date which I shed Tears upon at Woburn at some distance of time after his Death but I find that no length of time will dry them up I have spoiled the entireness of that Scene of Tyranny which my Lord lived to see by frequent Digressions but it signifies nothing because the Bishops that mooted the Case with his Lordship supposed the Religion and Rights of the Nation to be Actually Invaded which Case his Lordship wisely shortened by saying that our Religion being established by Law was a Civil Right and so the Question reduced is in short Whether the Rights of the Nation being Actually Invaded may be Defended And here I join Issue with those two Bishops and so I would with a Bench of them upon these two Points which I will maintain First That the Rights of the Nation being Invaded may be Defended Secondly That no body has a Right to Defend them but they whose Rights they are First That the Rights of the Nation being Invaded may be Defended for otherwise they are No Rights They may be the Effects of special Grace and Favour Bounties Courtesies Court-Smiles Places at Whithall during Pleasure the Breath of the Court which may be suckt in again ill-advised Gifts which may be recalled by Acts of Resumption or any thing but Rights If I cannot defend that which is mine from him that would take it away then it was not mine from the first As Mr. Selden used to say he that had but Two pence was King of Two pence and might defend his own against a King of Ten-pence What signifies the King's having more Rights than I if they be all upon the same Bottom for if he Invades my Two-pence at the same time he destroys his own Ten-pence because he breaks down that Hedge of the Law which secures all Mens Rights and then I am sure all lies in Common Words do but darken so clear a Point for if any thing be mine it is mine to Have and to Hold. Secondly That no body has a Right to defend these Rights but they whose Rights they are This necessarily follows from the Former for Rights must be a Man 's to Have before they can be his to Hold. Besides what has any body else to do with other Mens Rights It must needs be that the Rights of a Nation are to be Defended for Kings and Queens and all the Retinue of Government were ordained by the Nation for that very End and if they turn upon us and Invade our Rights as Chancellor Fortescue saysâ— We are Defrauded and over-reached in our first Intention for then our King shall Injure us which before we had Kings it was Lawful for No Man to do That 's a hard Case for a King of England had always Revenue enough to keep him Honest and had no need to take indirect ways to Enslave his People that is to say to put an end to a Government which it was so much worth his while to keep And there can no Tolerable Account be given of the Attempts made in the three last Reigns upon our Liberties but only Bigottry They had a mind to Convert their Kingdoms and knowing that most Mens Souls follow their Bodies they took it for Granted that if they established an absolute Empire over the one they should have a full Command of the other And so after a world of Arbitrary Proceedings the Common-Prayer-Book was sent down into Scotland where the King had no more Right to send it than into the Mogull's Countrey but it was under a Pretence of Uniformity when there was nothing less meant for it varied from ours and was nearer the Original Mass-book out of which it was taken No the Design was to enter them of the King's Religion and then they might have had a New Edition of their
Common-Prayer-Book the next Year and then the Reason of Uniformity holding alike in both Kingdoms ours ought to be like theirs But the old Herb-woman at Edinburgh put an end to that Game for hearing the Arch-Bishop who watch'd the Rubrick directing him that read the Book to read the Collect for the Day she made a Gross mistake and cried The Diewl Collick in the Wemb of thee and withal threw her Cricket-stool at his Head which gave a Beginning to the War of Scotland for when the Statesmen have reduced a Kingdom to Tinder the least Spark will kindle it The Best Friends that King had and who spilt their Blood for him cannot deny but he had set his Heart upon a Laudean Religion and an English Patriarchate which we all know would have ended in Latin and have been still Ecclesia Anglicana as it was in all Ages I must needs be very Impartial in relating these things for I was a great Neutral in those Days I cannot say I was so in the following Times for I saw the Church-game played here and heard of the Counterpart which was at the Pyrâ—naean Treaty and in the Polish Memorial and I have viewed the very Mass-house where the Last opened Shop and wanted Customers Now we ought to be somewhat the wiser for our Dear bought Experience and never to suffer a Prince Popishly inclined to be admitted to the Government more for they have a standing Pretence of Religion and Conscience to Enslave the Nation and to do it for our own Good to save our Souls and so all our Temporals shall go to wreck in ordine ad Spiritualia whereas whenever a Prince is known to be of our own Religion or of a Travelling Religion which will comply with our's then he has no Church-Pretence of spoiling the Government he cannot be Arbitrary if he would because he has no Excuse left he must Tyrannize for Tyranny's sake and that being open will never go far nor last long Nor will any wise Protestant Prince venture upon such a Hazardous thing for if he should miscarry in it he will not have so much as a Bull from Rome to Bless himself withall And if any future Prince should arise who should think that to be Prerogative which those former Kings practised and thereupon form a Resolution that the Crown of England shall not be the worse for his wearing I shall humbly offer him my Advice before hand not to think of Their Crown for it was no wearing Crown it was so stufft with Prerogative that it was top-heavy and it visibly hurt two of the Heads that wore it I know not nor I care not who eased the Middlemost of that Burden But our Present King came on purpose as appears by his Two Declarations to discharge the Crown of all Arbitrariness and to reduce it to the Standard So that if our Parliaments do not pursue the Ends of those Declarations which are Annexed to the Crown and are the Foundation of this Government they betray the Nation and are Worse to us than the Pensioner Parliament was 2 dly The second Thing which I propounded was to Consider the Point of Defending our Rights wiâ—h Reference to this Revoâ—ution In which I shall carefully Distinguish betwixt the English Right of Self-Defence and the welcome Assistance of the Prince of Orange which came like a Hand out of the Clouds to Help us First I say That if the People of England have not a Right to Defend their Liberties and Properties against Tyranny they have neither Liberties nor Properties 2 dly When this Nation falls under Tyranny they must be Delivered either by Miracle or Means Not by Miracle as a Great Man very Truly said and therefore we must use the Means 3 dly If we have not a Power within our selves to Preserve our selves then as Mr. Manwood said in Queen Elizabeth's Time in Parliament The Realm is no Realm but we depend upon some body from Abroad 4 thly I say That neither the Duke of Hanover nor any other Foreign Prince who is Related to the Royal Family is Guarantee to the Coronation Oath and the Oath of Allegiance which are the Terms of this Government 5 thly That if the Prince of Orange had not come in by the Sollicitation and Consent of the English People it had been a Proper Invasion 6 thly The Original Right which the People of England have to Defend themselves enables them to Call for Assistance whenever they are beâ—set and cannot help themselves and to Pray in Aid And here this Happy Revolution Centers For it would be a strange Thing to me That any Person who only looks over the Hedge should have more Right to Defend a Man's Freehold than the Owner himself who is upon the Premises And thus I have done with the Maxim about Defence and come at last to our Author's Touchstone of Maxims which is That all which tend to the inevitable Destruction of Cities and Societies as indiffeasable Allegiance does are False Maxims But what then is become of their Darling Maxim with which their Churches used to Ecchoe in the Exclusion-Time Fiat Iustitia pereat Mundus Let the Duke of York have his No Right though the World go to wreck For that was the true English of it True or False they have no Maxims nor Principles at all for they are steddy in none For is not Fiat Iustitia pereat Mundus as True a Maxim in an Abdication as in an Exclusion It is with some Assurance that I speak it because I have already proved it That Allegiance is a rigid obstinate unalterable and Indefeasible Thing and that it must be Dissolved by one of the two Parties themselves but is Impossible to be Dissolved by any Third Person I had but Two Maxims in the World in reference to State-matters the one was that Honesty is the Best Policy and the other was that Allegiance is Indefeasible and he is a going to take away my last Maxim from me which I will not part with because I have Sworn it to King William and Queen Mary I said I would not part with my Indiffesable Allegiance but he brings a whole Posse upon me to prove it false in these words And this is the Opinion in which all who have considered this Matter either as Lawyers as Casuists do agree Now I say That All his Lawyers and Casuists never said a word of Truth in their whole Lives For All Lawyers and Casuists are None and He having named No body I have Affronted No body But whenever he pleases to name his Lawyers and Casuists and produce their strong Reasons against my Indiffeasible Allegiance I will talk with them round In the mean time I am weary and break off here FINIS Books written by the Reverend Mr. Samuel Johnson JVlian the Apostate Being a short â—â—ount of his Life the Sense of the Primitive Châ—istians about his Succession and their Behaviour towards him Together with a Comparison of Popery and Paganism Iulian's Arts to undermine and extirpate Christianity Together with Answers to Constantius the Apostate and Iovian Remarks upon Dr. Shâ—rlock's Book intituled The Case of Resistance of the Supream Power stated and reâ—olved according to the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures Reflections on the History of Passive Obedience A second five Year's Struggle against Popery and Tyranny being a Collection of Papers published by the Reverend Mr. Samuel Iohnson during his last Imprisonment of five Years and ten Days Wherein are contained these following Tracts 1. A Sermon preached at Guildhall-Chappel 2. The Church of England as by Law established c. 3. Godly and wholsom Doctrine and necessary for these Times 4. A short Disswasive â—rom Popery and from Countenancing and Encouraging Papists 5. A Parcel of wry Reasons wrong Inferences but right Observator 6. An Oration of Mr. Iohn Hales 7. Several Reasons â—or the establishing a standing Army and the dissolving the Militia 8. Four Chapters 1. Oâ— Magistracy 2. Of Prerogative by Divine Right 3. Of Obedience 4. Of Laws 9. The Grounds and Reasons of the Laws against Popery 10. An Humble and Hearty Address to all the English Protestants in King Iames's Army 11. The Opinion that Resistance may be used in case our Religion and Rights should be invaded 12. The Trial and Examination of the New Test of the Church of England's Loyalty 13. Reflections upon the Instance of the Church of England's Loyalty 14. The absolute Impossibility of Transubstantiation demonstrated 15. Bishop Ridley's Letter to Bishop Hooper with some Observations on it 16. A Letter from a Freeholder to the rest of the Freeholders of England 17. Religion founded upon a Rock 18. The True Mother Church An Argument proving That the Abrogation of King Iames by the People of England from the Regal Throne and the Promotion of the Prince of Orange oâ—e of the Royal Family to the Throne of the Kingdom in his stead was according to the Constitution of the English Government and Prescribed by it In Opposition to all the false and treacherous Hypotheses of Usuâ—pation Conâ—quest Desertion and of taking the Powers that Are upon Content An Essay concerning Parliaments at a Certainty or the Kalends of May.