that may save in all thy cities and thy judges of whom thou saidest give me a king and princes I gave thâ—â— a king in mine anger and took him 〈…〉 my wrath And Gidem that warlike Judg that was greater than a King I will not rule over you says he 〈…〉 shall my son rule over you the Lord shall rule over you Judges Chap the 8th Intimating thereby that it is not fit for a man but for God only to exercise Dominion over men And hence Josephus in his Book against Aâ—… an Egyptian Grammarian and a â—oulmouth'd fellow like you calls the Commonwealth of the Hebrews a Theocracy because the principality was in God only In Isaiah Chap. 26. v. 13. The people in their repentance complain that it had been mischievous to them that other Lords besides God himself had had Dominion over them All which places prove clearly that God gave the Israelites a King in his anger but now who can forbear laughing at the use you make of Abimelech's story Of whom it is said when he was kill'd partly by a woman that hurl'd a piece of a Mill-stone upon him and partly by his own Armour-Bearer that God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech This History say you proves strongly that God only is the Judge and Avenger of Kings Yea if this Argument holds he is the only Judge and Punisher of Tyrants Villanous Rascals and Bastards whoever can get into the Saddle whether by right or by wrong has thereby obtain'd a Soveraign Kingly right over the people is out of all danger of punishment all inferior Magistrates must lay down their Arms at his feet the people must not dare to mutter But what if some great notorious robber had perished in War as Abimelech did would any man infer from thence That God only is the Judge and Punisher of High-way men Or what if Abimelech had been condemn'd by the Law and died by an Executioner's hand would not God then have rendred his wickedness You never read that the Judges of the Children of Israel were ever proceeded against according to Law And yet you confess That where the Government is an Aristocracy the Prince if there be any may and ought to be call'd in question if he break the Laws This in your 47th Page And why may not a Tyrant as well be proceeded against in a Kingly Government Why because God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech So did the Women and so did his own Armour-bearer over both which he pretended to a right of Soveraignty And what if the Magistrates had rendred his wickedness Do not they bear the Sword for that very purpose for the punishment of Malefactors Having done with his powerful argument from the History of Abimelech's death he bâ—takes himself as his custom is to Slanders and Calumnies nothing but dirt and filth comes from him but for those things that he promis'd to make appear he hath not prov'd any one of them either from the Scriptures or from the Writings of the Rabbins He alledges no reason why Kings should be above all Laws and they only of all mortal men exempt from punishment if they deserve it He falls foul upon those very Authors and Authorities that he makes use of and by his own Discourse demonstrates the truth of the opinion that he argues against And perceiving that he is like to do but little good with his arguments he endeavours to bring an odium upon us by loading us with slanderous accusations as having put to death the most Vertuous innocent Prince that ever reign'd VVas King Solomon says he better than King Charles the First I confess some have ventur'd to compare his Father King James with Solomon nay to make King James the better Gentleman of the 〈◊〉 Solomon was David's Son David had been Sauâ—… â—…n but king James was the Son of the End of Darly who as â—uchanan tells us because Dâ—… the Musitian get into the Queen's Bed-Chamber at an unseasonable time kill'd him a little after he could not get to him then because he had Bolted the Door on the inside So that King James being the Son of an Earâ— was the better Gentleman and was frequently called a second Solomon though it is not very certain that himself was not the Son of David the Musitian too But how could it ever come into your head to make a comparison betwixt King Câ—ries and Solomon For that very King Charles whom you praise thus to the sky that very man's obâ—…acy and covetousness and cruelty his hard usage of all good and honest men the Wars that he rais'd the Spoilings and Plunderings and Conflagrations that he occasioned and the death of innumerable of his Subjects that he was the cause of does his Son Charles at this very time whilest I 'm a writing confess and bewail in the Stool of Repentance in Scotland and renounces there that Kingly right that you assert but since you delight in Parallels let 's compare King Charles and King Solomon together a little Solomon began his reign with the death of his Brother who had justly deserved it King Charles began his with his Father's Funeral I do not say with his Murder and yet all the marks and tokens of Poyson that may be appeared in his dead body but the suspition lighted upon the Duke of Buckingham only whom the 〈◊〉 notwithstanding cleared to the Parliament though he had killed the King and his Father and not only soâ— but he dissolved the Parliament lest the matter should be enquired into Solomon oppressed the people with heavy Taxes but he spent that â—…upon the Temple of God and in raising other publick Buildings King Charles spent his in Extravag 〈◊〉 Solomon was enticed to Idolatry by many Wives This man by one Solomon though he were seduced himself we read not that he seduced others but King Charles seduced and enticed others not only by large and ample rewards to corrupt the Church but by his Edicts and Ecclesiastical Constitutions he compelled them to set up Altars which all Protestants abhor and to bow down to Crucifixes painted over them on the Wall But yet for all this Solomon was not condemned to die Nor does it follow because he was not that therefore he ought not to have been Perhaps there were many Circumstances that made it then not expedient But not long after the people both by words and actions made appear what they took to be their right when Ten Tribes of Twelve revolted from his Son and if he had not saved himself by flight it is very likely they would have stoned him notwithstanding his Threats and big swelling words CHAP. III. HAving proved sufficiently that the Kings of the Jews were subject to the same Laws that the people were That there are no exceptions made in Scripture That 't is a most false assertion grounded upon no reason nor warranted by any Authority to say That Kings may do what they list with Impunity That God has exempted them
him as our Guide and adoring the impresses of his Divine Power manifested upon all occasions we went on in no obscure but an illustrious Passage pointed out and made plain to us by God himself Which things if I should so much as hope by any diligence or ability of mine such as it is to discourse of as I ought to do and commit them so to writing as perhaps all Nations and all Ages may read them it would be a very vain thing in me For what stile can be august and magnificent enough what man has parts sufficient to undertake so great a Task since we find by Experience that in so many Ages as are gone over the World there has been but here and there a man found who has been able worthily to recount the Actions of Great Heroes and Potent States can any man have so good an opinion of himself as to think himself capable to reach these glorious and wonderful Works of Almighty God by any Language by any stile of his Which Enterprize though some of the most Eminent Persons in our Commonwealth have prevailed upon me by their Authority to undertake and would have it be my business to vindicate with my Pen against Envy and Calumny which are proof against Arms those Glorious Performances of theirs whose opinion of me I take as a very great honour that they should pitch upon me before others to be serviceable in this kind to those most Valiant Deliverers of my Native-Countrey and true it is that from my very youth I have been bent extremely upon such sort of Studies as inclin'd me if not to do great things my self at least to celebrate those that did yet as having no confidence in any such Advantages I have recourse to the Divine Assistance And invoke the Great and Holy God the Giver of all good Gifts that I may as substantially and as truly discuss and refute the Sawciness and Lies of this Foreign Declamator as our Noble Generals piously and successfully by force of Arms broke the King's Pride and his unruly Domineering and afterwards put an end to both by inflicting a memorable Punishment upon himself and as throughly as a single person did with case but of late confute and confound the King himself rising as it were from the Grave and recommending himself to the People in a Book publish'd after his death with new Artisices and Allurements of Words and Expressions Which Antagonist of mine though he be a Foreigner and though he deny it a thousand times over but a poor Grammarian yet not contented with the Salary due to him in that Capacity chose to turn a Pragmatical Coxcomb and not only to intrude in State-Affairs but into the Affairs of a Foreign State tho he brings along with him neither Modesty nor Understanding â—or any other qualification requisite in so great an Arbitrator but Sawciness and a little Grammar only Indeed if he had publish'd here and in English the same things that he has now wrote in Latin such as it is I think no man would have thought it worth while to return an Answer to them but would partly despise them as common and exploded over and over already and partly abhor them as sordid and Tyrannical Maxims not to be endured even by the most abject of Slaves Nay men that have even sided with the King would have had these thoughts of his Book But since he has swol'n it to a considerable bulk and dispers'd it amongst Foreigners who are altogether ignorant of our Affairs and Constitution it 's sit that they who mistake them should be better informed and that he who is so very forward to speak ill of others should be treated in his own kind If it be asked why we did not then attack him sooner why we suffered him to triumph so long and pride himself in our silence For others I am not to answer for my self I can boldly say That I had neither had words nor Arguments long to seek for the defence of so good a Cause if I had enjoyed such a measure of health as would have endur'd the fatigue of writing And being but yet weak in Body I am forced to write by piece-meal and break off almost every hour though the Subject be such as requires an unintermitted study and intenseness of mind But though this bodily Indisposition may be a hindrance to me in setting forth the just Praises of my most worthy Countreymen who have been the Saviours of their Native Country and whose Exploits worthy of Immortality are already famous all the World over yet I hope it will be no difficult matter for me to defend them from the Insolence of this silly little Scholar and from that sawey Tongue of his at least Nature and Laws would be in an ill case if Slavery should find what to say for it self and liberty be mute and if Tyrants should find men to plead for them and they that can master and vanquish Tyrants should not be able to find Advocates And it were a deplorable thing indeed if the Reason Mankind is endu'd withal and which is the gift of God should not furnish more Arguments for mens Preservation for their Deliverance and as much as the nature of the thing will bear for making them equal to one another than for their oppression and for their utter ruine under the Domineering Power of One single Person Let me therefore enter upon this Noble Cause with a chearfulness grounded upon this Assurance That my Adversary's Cause is maintain'd by nothing but Fraud Fallacy Ignorance and Barbarity whereas mine has Light Truth Reason the Practice and the Learning of the best Ages of the World of its side But now having said enough for an Introduction since we have to do with Criticks let us in the first place consider the Title of this Choice Piece Defensio Regia pro Car. Primo ad Car. Secundum A Royal Defence or the King's Defence for Charles the First to Charles the Second You undertake a wonderful piece of work whoever you are to plead the Father's Cause before his own Son a hundred to one but you carry it But I summon you Salmasius who heretofore sculk'd under a wrong name and now go by no name at all to appear before another Tribunal and before other Judges where perhaps you may not hear those little Applauses which you use to be so fond of in your School But why this Royal Defence dedicated to the King 's own Son We need not put him to the torture he confesses why At the King charge says he O mercenary and chargeable Advocate could you not afford to write a Defence for Charles the Father whom you pretend to have been the best of Kings to Charles the Son the most indigent of all Kings but it must be at the poor King 's own Charge But though you are a Knave you would not make your self ridiculous in calling it the King's Defence for you having sold it it
a King But we do not bear with a Father if he be a Tyrant If a Father murder his Son himself must die for 't and why should not a King be subject to the same Law which certainly is a most just one Especially considering that a Father cannot by any possibility divest himself of that relation but a King easily may make himself neither King nor Father of his people If this action of ours be considered according to its quality as you call it I who am both an English man born and was an eye-witness of the Transactions of these times tell you who are both a Foreigner and an utter stranger to our Affairs That we have not put to death a good nor a just nor a merciful nor a devout nor a godly nor a peaceable King as you stile him but an Enemy that has been so to us almost ten years to an end nor one that was a Father but a Destroyer of his Country You confess that such things have been 〈◊〉 for your self have not the impudence to deny it but nâ—t by Protestants upon a Protestant King As if he deserv'd the name of a Protestant that in a Letter to the Pope could give him the title of Most Holy Father that was always more favourable to the Papists than to those of his own Profession And being such he is not the first of his own Family that has been put to death by Protestants Was not his Grand-mother deposed and banisht and at last beheaded by Protestants And were not her own Countrymen that were Protestants too well enough pleas'd with it Nay if I should say they were parties to it I should not lie But there being so few Protestant Kings it is no great wonder if it never happened that one of them has been put to death But that it is lawful to depose a Tyrant and to punish him according to his deserts Nay that this is the opinion of very eminent Divines and of such as have been most Instrumental in the late Reformation do you deny if you dare You confess that many Kings have come to an unnatural death Some by the Sword some poyson'd some strangled and some in a dungeon but for a King to be arraign'd in a Court of Judicature to be put to plead for his life to have Sentence of death pronounc'd against him and that Sentence exâ—cuted this you think a more lamentable Instance than all the rest and make it a prodigious piece of impiety Tell me thou superlative Fool Whether it be not more just more agreeable to the Rules of Humanity and the Laws of all Humane Societies to bring a Criminal be his Offence what it will before a Count of Justice to give him leave to speak for himself and if the Law condemn him then to put him to death as he has dâ—â—erv'd so as he may have time to repent or to recollect himself than presently as soon as ever he is taken to butâ—hâ—r him without more ado 〈◊〉 think there 's a Malâ—…r in the World that if he might have his choice would not chuse to be thus dealt withal and if this sort of proceeding against a private Person be accounted the fairer of the two why should it not be counted so against a Prince nay why should we not think that himself liked it better You would have had him kill'd privately and none to have seen it either that future Ages might have lost the advantage of so good an Example or that they that did this glorious Action might seem to have avoided the Light and to have acted contrary to Law and Justice You aggravate the matter by telling us that it was not done in an uproar or brought about by any Faction amongst Great Men or in the heat of a Rebellion either of the People or the Soldiers that there was no hatred no fear no ambition no blind precipitate rashness in the Case but that it was long consulted on and done with deliberation You did well in leaving off being an Advocate and turn Grammarian That from the Accidents and Circumstances of a thing which in themselves considered sway neither one way nor other argue in dispraise of it before you have proved the thing it self to be either good or bad See how open you lie If the Action you are discoursing of be commendable and praise-worthy they that did it deserve the greater Honour in that they were prepossessed with no Passions but did what they did for Virtue 's sake If there were great difficulty in the enterprise they did well in not going about it rashly but upon Advice and Consideration Thâ— for my own part when I call to mind with how unexpected an importunity and servency of Mind and with how unanimous a Consent the whole Army and a great part of the People from almost every County in the Kingdom cried out with one Voice for Justice against the King as being the sole Author of all their Calamities I cannot but think that these things were brought about by a Divine impulse Whatever the matter was whether we consider the Magistrates or the Body of the People no Men ever underâ—ook with more Courage and which our Adversaries themselves confess in a more 〈◊〉 temper of Mind so brave an Action an Action that might have become those famous Heroes of whom we read in former Ages an Action by which they â—â—nobled not only Laws and their Execution which seem for the future equally restor'd to high and low against one another but even Justice it self and to have rendred it after so signal a Judgment more illustrious and greater than in its own self We are now come to an end of the third page of the First Book and have not the bare Narrative he promis'd us yet He complains that our Principles arâ— â—hat a King whose Government is Burdensom and Odiâ—s may lawfully be deposed And by this Doâ—… says he if they had had a King a thousand times 〈◊〉 thann they had they would not have spared his Life Observe the Man's subtle way of arguing For I would willingly be inform'd what Consequence there 〈◊〉 in this unless he allows that a King's Government may be Burdersâ—m and Odieus who is a thousand 〈◊〉 better than our King was So that now he has brought things to this pass to make the King that he defends a thousand times worse than some whose Government notwithstanding is Burdensom and Oâ—… 〈◊〉 is it may be the most monstrous Tyrant that 〈◊〉 â—…d I wish ye Joy O ye Kings of 〈…〉 able a Defender Now the Narrative begins They put him to sâ—…ral sorts of Torments Give an inâ—… They remov'd him from Prison to Prison and so they might lawfully do for having been a Tyrant he became an open Enemy and was taken in War Often changing his Keepers Lest they themselves should change Sometimes they gave him hopes of Liberty nay and sometimes even of restoring him to his Crown upon Articles of Agreement It
people had wash'd off that anointing of his whether Sacred or Civil with the Blood of his own Subjects I confess that those Kings whom God by his Prophets anointed to be Kings or appointed to some special service as he did Cyrus Isa 44. may not improperly be called the Lord 's Anointed but all other Princes according to the several ways of their coming to the Government are the People 's Anointed or the Army's or many times the Anointed of their own Faction only But taking it for granted That all Kings are God's Anointed you can never prove That therefore they are above all Laws and not to be called in question what Villanies soever they commit What if David laid a charge upon himself and other private persons not to stretch forth their hands against the Lord 's Anointed Does not God himself command Princes not so much as to touch his anointed Which were no other than his people Psal 105. He preferred that Anointing wherewith his People were Anointed before that of Kings if any such thing were Would any man offer to infer from this place of the Psalmist That Believers are not to be called in question tho they offend against the Laws because God commands Princes not to touch his Anointed King Solomon was about to put to death Abiathar the Priest tho he were God's Anointed too and did not spare him because of his Anointing but because he had been his Father's Friend If that Sacred and Civil Anointing wherewith the High-Priest of the Jews was anointed whereby he was not only constituted High-Priest but a Temporal Magistrate in many cases did not exempt him from the Penalty of the Laws how comes a Civil Anointing only to exempt a Tyrant But you say Saul was a Tyrant and worthy of death What then It does not follow that because he deserved it that David in the circumstances he was then under had power to put him to death without the People's Authority or the command of the Magistracy But was Saul a Tyrant I wish you would say so indeed you do so though you had said before in your Second Book page 32. That he was no Tyrant but a good King and chosen of God Why should false Accusers and Men guilty of Forgery be branded and you escape without the like ignominious Mark For they practice their Villanies with less Treachery and Deceit than you write and Treat of matters of the greatest moment Saul was a good King when it serv'd your turn to have him so and now he 's a Tyrant because it suits with your present purpose But 't is no wonder that you make a Tyrant of a good King for your Principles look as if they were invented for no other design than to make all good Kings so But yet David tho he would not put to Death his Father-in-Law for Causes and Reasons that we have nothing to do withal yet in his own Defence he raised an Army took and possessed Cities that belong'd to Saul and would have defended Kâ—ilah against the King's Forces had he not understood that the Citizens would be false to him Suppose Saul had besieged the Town and himself had been the first that had scal'd the Walls do you think David would presently have thrown down his Arms and have betray'd all those that assisted him to his anointed Enemy I believe not What reason have we to think David would have stuck to do what we have done who when his Occasions and Circumstances so required proffered his Assistance to the Philistines who were then the professed Enemies of his Country and did that against Saul which I am sure we should never have done against our Tyrant I 'm weary of mentioning your Lies and asham'd of them You say t is a Maxim of the English That Enemies are rather to be spared than Friends and that therefore we conceived we ought not to spare our King's Life because he had been our Friend You impudent Lyar what Mortal ever heard this Whimsy before you invented it But we 'll excuse it You could not bring in that thread-bare Flourish of our being more fierce than our own Mastiffs which now comes in the fifth time and will as oft again before we come to the end of your Book without some such Introduction We are not so much more fierce than our own Mastiffs as you are more hungry than any Dog whasoever who return so greedily to what you have vomitted up so often Then you tell us That David commanded the Amalekite to be put to Death who pretended to haveÌ„ killed Saul But that Instance neither in respect of the Fact nor the Person has any Affinity with what we are discoursing of I do not well understand what cause David had to be so severe up-upon that Man for pretending to have hastned the King's Death and in effect but to have put him out of his pain when he was dying unless it were to take away from the Israelites all Suspicion of his own having been instrumental in it whom they might look upon as one that had revolted to the Philistines and was part of their Army Just such another Action as this of David's do all Men blame in Domitian who put to Death Epaphroditus because he had helped Nero to kill himself After all this as another instance of your Impudence you call him not only the anointed of the Lord but the Lord 's Christ who a little before you had said was a Tyrant and acted by the impulse of some Evil Spirit Such mean thoughts you have of that Reverend Name that you are not asham'd to give it to a Tyrant whom you your self confess to have been possessed with the Devil Now I come to that President from which every Man that is not blind must needs infer the Right of the People to be Superior to that of Kings When Solomon was dead the People Assembled themselves at Sichem to make Rehoboam King Thither himself went as one that stood for the place that he might not seem to claim the Succession as his Inheritance the same Right over a freeborn People that every Man has over his Fathers Sheep and Oxen. The People propose Conditions upon which they were willing to admit him to the Government He desires three days time to advise he consults with the old Men they tell him no such thing as that he had an absolute Right to succeed but persuade him to comply with the People and speak them fair it being in their Power whether he should Reign or not Then he adviseth with the young Men that were brought up-with him they as if Salmasius's Phrensy had taken them thunder this Right of Kings into his Ears persuade him to threaten the People with Whips and Scorpions And he answered the People as they advised him When all Israel saw that the King hearkned not to them then they openly protest the Right of the People and their own Liberty What portion have we in David To thy
Partner in the Soveraign Power because he molested the Eastern Christians by which act of his he declared thus much at least That one Magistrate might punish another for he for his Subjects take punished â—icinius who to all intents was as abso 〈◊〉 in the Empire as himself and did not leave the vengeance to God alone Licinius might have done the same to Constantine if there had been the like occasion So then if the matter be not wholly reserved to Gods own Tribunal but that men have something to do in the case why did not the Parliament of England stand in the same relation to King Charles that Constantine did to Licinius The Soldiers made Constantine what he was But our Laws have made our Parliaments equal nay superior to our Kings The Inhabitants of Constantinople resisted Constantius an Arrian Emperour by force of Arms as long as they were able they opposed Hermogenes whom he had sent with a Military power to depose Paul an Orthodox Bishop the house whither he had betaken himself for security they fired about his ears and at last killed him right out Constans threatned to make War upon his Brother Constantius unless he would restore Paul and Athanasius to their Bishopricks You see those holy Fathers when their Bishopricks were in danger were not ashamed to stir up their Prince's own Brother to make War upon him Not long after the Christian Soldiers who then made whom they would Emperors put to death Constans the Son of Constantinus because he behaved himself dissolutely and proudly in the Government and Translated the Empire to Magnentius Nay those very persons that saluted Julian by the name of Emperour against Constantius his will who was actually in possession of the Empire for Julian was not then an Apostate but a vertuous and valiant person are they not amongst the number of those Primitive Christians whose Example you propose to us for our imitation which action of theirs when Constantius by his Letters to the people very sharply and earnestly forbad which Letters were openly read to them they all cried out unanimously That themselves had but done what the Provincial Magistrates the Army and the Authority of the Commonwealth had decreed The same persons declared War against Constantius and contributed as much as in them lay to deprive him both of his Government and his Life How did the Inhabitants of Antioch behave themselves who were none of the worst sort of Christians I 'le warrant you they prayed for Julian after he became an Apostate whom they used to rail at in his own presence and scoffing at his long Beard bid him make Ropes of it Upon the news of whose death they gave publick Thanksgivings made Feasts and gave other publick Demonstrations of Joy do you think they used when he was alive to pray for the continuance of his life and health Nay is it not reported that a Christian Soldier in his own Army was the Author of his Death Sozomen a Writer of the Ecclesiastical History does not deny it but commends him that did it if the fact were so For it is no wonder says he that some of his own Soldiers might think within himself that not only the Greeks but all Mankind hitherto had agreed that it was a commendable action to kill a Tyrant and that they deserve all mens praise who are willing to die themselves to procure the liberty of all others so that that Soldier ought not rashly to be condemned who in the cause of God and of Religion was so zealous and valiant These are the words of Sozomen a good and Religious man of that age by which we may easily apprehend what the general opinion of pious men in those days was upon this point Ambrose himself being commanded by the Emperour Valentinian the Younger to depart from Milan refused to obey him but defended himself and the Palace by force of Arms against the Emperour's Officers and took upon him contrary to his own Doctrine to resist the higher powers There was a great sedition raised at Constantinople against the Emperour Areadius more than once by reason of Chrysostom's Exile Hitherto I have shewn how the Primitive Christians behaved themselves towards Tyrants how not only the Christian Soldiers and the people but the Fathers of the Church themselves have both made War upon them and opposed them with force and all this before St. Austin's time for you your self are pleased to go down no lower and therefore I make no mention of Valentinian the Son of Placidia who was slain by Maximus a Senator for committing Adultery with his Wife nor do I mention Avitus the Emperour whom because he disbanded the Soldiers and betook himself wholly to a luxurious life the Roman Senate immediately deposed because these things came to pass some years after St. Austin's death But all this I give you Suppose I had not mentioned the practice of the Primitive Christians suppose they never had stirred in opposition to Tyrants suppose they had accounted it unlawful so do I will make it appear that they were not such persons as that we ought to â—ely upon their Authority or can safely follow their Example Long before Constantine's time the generality of Christians had lost much of the Primitive Sanctity and integity both of their Doctrine and Manners Afterwards when he had vastly enriched the Church they began to fall in love with Honour and Civil Power and then the Christian Religion went to wrack First Luxury and Sloth and then a great drove of Herches and Immoralities broke loose among them and these begot Envy Hatred and Discord which abounded every where At last they that were linked together into one Brotherhood by that holy band of Religion were as much at variance and strife amongst themselves as the most bitter Enemies in the world could be No reverence for no consideration of their duty was left amongst them the Soldiers and Commanders of the Army as oft as they pleased themselves created new Emperors and sometimes killed good ones as well as bad I need not mention such as Verannio Alaximus Eugenius whom the Soldiers all on a sudden advanced and made them Emperors nor Gratian an excellent Prince nor Valentinian the younger who was none of the worst and yet were put to death by them It is true these things were acted by the Soldiers and Soldiers in the field but those Soldiers were Christians and lived in that Age which you call Evangelical and whose example you propose to us for our imitation Now you shall hear how the Clergy managed themselves Pastors and Bishops and sometimes those very Fathers whom we admire and extol to so high a degree every one of whom was a Leader of their several Flocks those very men I say fought for their Bishopricks as Tyrants did for their Soveraignty sometimes throughout the City sometimes in the very Churches sometimes at the Altar Clergy-men and Lay-men fought promiscuously they slew one another and great
as that with the same breath that you commend the Obedience and Submissiveness of those Nations of your own accord you make mention of Sardanapalus'r being deprived of his Crown by Arbaces Neither was it he alone that accomplished that Enterprise for he had the assistance of the Priests who of all others were best versed in the Law and of the people and it was wholly upon this account that he deposed him because he abused his authority and power not by giving himself over to cruelty but to luxury and effeminacy Run over the Histories of Herodotus Ctâ—sias Diodorus and you will find things quite contrary to what you assert here you will find that those Kingdoms were destroyed for the most part by subjects and not by foreigners that the Assyrians were brought down by the Medes who then were their subjects and the Medes by the Persians who at that time were like wise subject to them Your self confess that Cyrus rebell'd and that at the same time in divers parts of the Empire little upstart Governments were formed by those that shook off the Medes But does this agree with what you said before does this prove the obedience of the Medes and Persians to their Princes and that Jus Regium which you had asserted to have been universally received amongst those Nations What Potion can cure this brainsâ—… frenzy of yours You say It appears by Herodotus how absolute the Persian Kings were Cambyses being desirous to marry his Sister consulted with the Judges who were the Interpreters of the Laws to whose Judgment all difficult matters were to be referred What answer had he from them They told him They knew no Law which permitted a Brother to marry his Sister but another Law they knew that the Kings of Persia might do what they listed Now to this I answer if the Kings of Persia were really so absolute what need was there of any other to interpret the Laws besides the King himself Those superfluous unnecessary Judges would have had their abode and residence in any other place rather than in the Palace where they were altogether useless Agâ—in if those Kings might do what ever they would it is not credible that so ambitious a Prince as Cambyses was should be so ignorant of that grand Prerogative as to consult with the Judges whether what he desired were according to Law What was the matter then either they designed to humour the King as you say they did or they were afraid to cross his inclination which is the account that Herodotus gives of it and so told him of such a Law as they knew would please him and in plain terms made a fool of him which is no new thing with Judges and Lawyers now a days But say you Artabanus a Persian told Themistocles that there was no better Law in Persia than that by which it was Enacted That Kings were to be honoured and adored An excellent Law that was without doubt which commanded subjects to adore their Princes but the Primitive Fathers have long ago damned it and Artabanus was a proper person to commend such a Law who was the very man that a little while after slew Xerxes with his own hand You quote Regicides to assert Royalty I am afraid you have some design upon Kings In the next place you quote the Poet Claudian to prove how obedient the Persians were But I appeal to their Histories and Annals which are full of the Revolts of the Persians the Medes the Bactrians and Babylonians and give us frequent instances of the Murders of their Princes The next person whose authority you cite is Otanes the Persian who likewise killed Smerdis then King of Persia to whom out of the hatred which he bore to a Kingly Government he reckons up the impieties and injurious actions of Kings their violation of all Laws their putting men to death without a legal conviction their rapes and adulteries and all this you will have called the right of Kings and slander Samuel again as a teacher of such Doctrine You quote Homer who says that Kings derive their authority from Jupiter to which I have already given an answer For King Philip of Macedon whose asserting the right of Kings you make use of I 'le believe Charles his description of it as soon as his Then you quote some Sentences out of a fragment of Diogenes a Pythagorean but you do not tell us what sort of a King he speaks of Observe therefore how he begins that Discourse for whatever follows must be understood to have relation to it Let him be King says he that of all others is most just and so he is that acts most according to Law for no man can be King that is not just and without Laws there can be no Justice This is directly opposite to that Regal right of yours And Ecphantas whom you likewise quote is of the same opinion Whosoever takes upon him to be a King ought to be naturally most pure and clear from all imputation And a little after Him says he we call a King that governs well and he only is properly so So that such a King as you speak of according to the Philosophy of the Pythagoreans is no King at all Hear now what Plato says in his eighth Epistle Let Kings says he be liable to be called to account for what they do Let the Laws controul not only the people but Kings themselves if they do any thing not warranted by Law I 'le mention what Aristotle says in the Third Book of his Politicks It is neither for the Publick Good nor is it just says he where all men are by nature alike and equal that any one should be Lord and Master over all the rest neither where there are no Laws nor is it for the Publick Good or Just that one man should be a Law to the rest nor is it so where there are Laws nor that any one tho a good man thould be Lord over other good mâ—n nor a bad man over bad men And in the Fifth Book says he That King whom the people refuse to be govern'd by is no longer a King but a Tyrant Hear what Xenophon says in Hiero People are so far from revenging the Deaths of Tyrants that they confer great Honour upon him that Kills one and erect Statues in their Temples to the Honour of Tyrannicides Of this I can produce an 〈◊〉 witness Marcus Tullius in his Oration pro Milone The Grecians says he ascribe Divine Worship to such as kill Tyrants What things of this nature have 〈◊〉 my self seen at Athens and in other Cities of Greece How many Religious Observances have been inâ—…ted in honour of such men How many Hymns They are consecrated to Immortality and Adoration and their Memory endeavoured to be perpetuated And â—…ly Polybius an Historian of great Authority and Gravity in the Sixth Book of his 〈◊〉 says thus When Princes began to in 〈◊〉 their own Lusts and sensual Appetites then â—…doms
his own Court What you mean by the Members of the Court I would gladly know You enumerate the Calamities that the Romans underwent by changing their Kingdom into a Commowealth In which I have already shown how grosly you give your self the lye What was it you said when you wrote against the Jesuit You demonstrated That in an Aristocracy or a popular State there câ—uld but he Seditiâ—â—s and Tumults whereas under a Tyrant nothing was to be lâ—ked for but certain Ruin and Destruction And dare you now say you vain corrupt Mortal That thâ—se Seditions were Punishments inflicted upon them fâ—r Banâ—shing their Kings to wit because King Charles gave you a hundred Jacobussâ—s afterward Therefore the Romans shall be punished for Banishing their Kings But they that kill'd Julius Caesar did not prosper afterwards I confess if I would have had any Tyrant spared it should have been him For altho he introduced a Monarchical Government into a 〈◊〉 State by force of Arms yet perhaps himself deserved a Kingdom best and yet I conceive that none of those that killed him can be said to have been punished for so doing any more than Caius Anthonius 〈…〉 's Colleague for destroying Cataline who when he was afterward condemn'd for other Crimes says Cicero in his Oration Pro Flacco Cataline's Sepulchâ—… was adâ—rn'd with Flowers For they that fa voured Cataline then rejoyced They gave out then that what Cataline did was just to encrease the Peoples hatred against those that had cut him off These are Artifices which wicked Men make use of to deter the best of Men from punishing Tyrants and slagitious Persons I might as easily say the quite contrary and instance in them that have killed Tyrants and prospered afterwards if any certain inference might be drawn in such â—…ases from the Events of things You object further That the English did not put their Hereditary King to Death in like manner as Tyrants use to be slain but as Robbers and Traytors are executed In the first place I do not nor can any wise Man understand what a Crowns being Hereditary should contribute to a King's Crimes being unpunishable What you ascribe to the Barbarous Cruelty of the English proceeded rather for their Clemency and Moderation and as such deserves Commendation who tho the beinâ— a Tyrant is a Crime that comprehends all sorts of Enormities such as Robberies Treasons and Rebellions against the whole Nation yet were contented to inflict no greater punishment upon him for being so than they used of course to do upon any Common Highway-man or ordinary Traytor You hope some such Men as Harmodius and Thrasibulus will rise up amongst us and make Expiation for the King's Death by shedding thâ—ir Blood that were the Authors of it But you will run â—…d with despair and be detested by all good Men and put an end to that wretched Life of yours by hâ—nging your self before you see Men like Hâ—…dius avenging the Blood of a Tyrant upon such 〈◊〉 hâ—ve done no other than what they did themselves That you will come to such an end is most proâ—â—ble nor can any other be expected of so great a Rogue but the other thing is an utter impossibility You mention thirty Tyrants that rebelled in Callienus's time And what if it fall out that one Tyrant happens to oppose another must therefore all they that resist Tyrants be accounted such themselves You cannot persuade Men into such a belief you Slave of a Knight nor your Author Trebellius Pollio the most inconsiderable of all Historians that have writ If any of the Emperors were declared Enemies by the Senate you say it was done by Faction but could not have been by Law You put us in mind what it was that made Emperours at first It was Faction and Violence and to speak plainer it was the Madness of Anthony that made Generals at first Rebel against the Senate and the People of Rome there was no Law no Right for their so doing Galba you say was punished for his Insurection against Nero. Tell us likewise how â—â—spasian was punished for taking up Arms against Vitellius There was as much difference you say betwixt Charles and Nero as betwixt those English â—…chers and the Roman Senators of thâ—â— Age. Desâ—icâ—ble Villain by whom it is Scandalous to be commended and a Praise to be Evil spoken of But a few Periods before discoursing of this very thing you said That the Roman Senate under the Emperors was in effect but an Assembly of Slaves in Robes And here you say That very Senate was an Assembly of Kings which if it be allowed then are Kings according to your own Opinion but Slaves with Robes on Kings are blessed that have such a Fellow as you to write in their praise than whom no Man is more a Rascal no Beast more void of Sense unless this one thing may be said to be peculiar to you that none ever brayed so learnedly You make the Parliament of England more like to Nero than to the Roman Senate This itch of yours of making silly Similitudes enforces me to rectify you whether I will or no And I will let you see how like King Charles was to Nero. Nero you say commanded his own Mother to be run through with a Sword But Charles murdered both his Prince and his Father and that by Poyson For to omit other evidences he that would not suffer a Duke that was accused for it to come to his Tryal must needs have been guilty of it himself Nero slew many thousands of Christians but Charles slew many more There were those says Suetonius that praised Nero after he was dead that long'd to have had him again That hung Garlands of Flowers upon his Sepulchre and gave out that they would never prosper that had been his Enemies And some there are transported with the like Phrensy that wish for King Charles again and extol him to the highest degree imaginable of whom you a Knight of the Halter are a Ringleader The English Soldiers more Savage than their own Mastiffs erectâ—d a new and unheard-of Court of Justice Observe this ingenious Symbol or adage of Salmasius which he has now repeated six times over More Savage than their own Mastiffs Take notice Orators and School-Masters pluck if you are wise this Elegant Flower which Salmasius is so very fond of Commit this Flourish of a Man that is so much a Master of words to your Desks for safe Custody lest it be lost Has your rage made you forget words to that degree that like a Cuckcow you must needs say the same thing over and over again What strange thing has befallen you The Poet tells us That Spleen and Rage turn'd Hecuba into a Dog and it has turn'd you the Lord of St. Lupus into a Cuckow Now you come out with fresh Contradictions You had said before page 113. That Princes were not bound by any Laws neither Câ—ercive nor Directory that they were bound by no Law
is no longer yours but the King 's indeed who bought it at the price of a hundred Jacobusses a great Sum for a poor King to disburse I know very well what I say and 't is well enough known who brought the Gold and the Purse wrought with Beads We know who saw you reach out greedy fists under pretence of embracing the King's Chaplain who brought the Present but indeed to embrace the Present it self and by accepting it to exhaust almost all the King's Treasury But now the man comes himself the Door creaks the Actor comes upon the Stage In silence now and with attention wait That yee may learn what th' Eunuch has to prate Terent. For whatever the matter 's with him he blusters more than ordinary A horrible message had lately struck our Ears but our minds more with a heinous wound concerning a Parricide committed in England in the Person of a King by a wicked Conspiracy of Sacrilegious men Indeed that horrible Message must either have had a much longer Sword than that which Peter drew or those Ears must have been of a wonderful length that it could wound at such a distance for it could not so much as in the least offend any Ears but those of an Ass For what harm is it to you that are Foreigners are any of you hurt by it if we amongst our selves put our own Enemies our own Traytors to death be they Commoners Noble men or Kings Do you Salmasius let alone what does not concern you for I have a horrible Message to bring of you too which I 'm mistaken if it strike not a more heinous wound into the Ears of all Grammarians and Criticks provided they have any Learning and Delicacy in them To wit your crowding so many Barbarous Expressions together in one period in the person of Aristarchus a Grammarian and that so great a Critick as you hired at the King's charge to write a Defence of the King his Father should not only set so fulsome a Preface before it much like those Lamentable Ditties that used to be sung at Funerals and which can move compassion in none but a Cox-comb but in the very first sentence should provoke your Readers to laughter with so many Barbarisms all at once Persona Regir you cry Where do you find any such Latin Or are you telling us some tale or other of a Perkin Warchick who taking upon him the Person of a King has forsooth committed some horrible Parricide in England Which expression though dropping carelesly from your Pen has more truth in it than you are aware of For a Tyrant is but like a King upon a tage a man in a Vizor and acting the part of a Kâ—ng in a Play he is not really a King But as for thesâ— Gallicisms that are so frequent in your Book I wâ—…t lash you for them my self for I am not at leisure but shall deliver you over to your fellow Grammarians to be laught to scorn and whipt by them What follows is much more heinous that what was decreed by our Supreme Magistrates to be done to the King should be said by you to have been done by a wicked Conspiracy of Sacrilegious persons Have you the impudence you Rogue to talk at this rate of the Acts and Decrees of the chief Magistrates of a Nation that lately was a most Potent Kingdom and is now a more Potent Commonwealth Whose proceedings no Ring ever took upon him by word of mouth or otherwise to vilifie and set at nought The Illustrious States of Holland therefore the Genuine Off spring of those Deliverers of their Country have deservedly by their Edict condemn'd to utter darkness this Defence of Tyrants so pernicious to the Liberty of all Nations the Author of which every free State ought to forbid their Country or to banish out of it and that State particularly that feeds with a Stipend so ungrateful and so savage an Enemy to their Commonwealth whose very Fundamentals and the causes of their becoming a free State this Fellow endeavours to undermine as well as ours and at one and the same time to subvert both and loads with Calumnies the most worthy Asserters of Liberty there under our Names Consider with your selves ye most Illustrious States of the United Netherlands who it was that put this Asserter of Kingly Power upon setting Pen to Paper who it was that but lately began to play Rex in your Country what Counsels were taken what endeavours used and what disturbances ensued thereupon in Holland and to what pass things might have been brought by this time how Slavery and a new Master were ready prepar'd for you and how near expiring that Liberty of yours asserted and vindicated by so many years War and Toil would have been e're now if it had not taken breath again by the timely death of a certain rash young Gentleman But our Author begins to strut again and to feign wonderful Tragedies Whomsoever this dreadful news reacht to wit the news of Salmasius his Parricidial Barbarisms all of a sudden as if they had been struck with lightning their hair stood an end and their tongues clove to the roof of their mouth Which let Natural Philosophers take notice of for this secret in nature was never discovered before that lightning makes mens hair stand an end But who knows not that little effeminate minds are apt to be amaz'd at the news of any extiaordinary great Action and that then they show themselves to be what they really were before no better than so many Stocks Some could not refrain from tears some little Women at Court I suppose or if there be any more effeminate than they of whose number Salmasius himself being one is by a new Metamorphosis become a Fountain near akin to his Name Salmacis and with his counterfeit flood of tears prepared over night endeavours to emasculate generous minds I advise therefore and wish them to have a care Infamis ne quem malè fortibus undis Salmacis Enervet Ne si vir cum venerit exeat indè Semivir tactis subitò mollescat in undis Abstain as Manhood you esteem From Salmacis pernicious Stream If but one moment there you stay Too dear you 'l for your Bathing pay Depart nor Man nor Woman but a Sight Disgracing both a loath'd Hermaphrodite They that had more courage which yet the expresses in miserable bald Latin as if he could not so much as speak of men of courage and Magnanimity in proper words were set on fire with indignation to that degree that they could hardly contain themselves Those furious Hectors we value not of a rush We have been accustomed to rout such Bullies in the Field with a true sober courage a courage becoming men that can contain themselves and are in their right Wits There were none that did not curse the Authors of so Horrible a Villany But yet you say their tongues clove to the roof of their mouths and if you mean this
your Bones well-thrash'd with a Fool 's staff for thinking to stir up Kings and Princes to War by such Childish Arguments Then you cry aloud to all Nations who I know full well will never heed what you say You call upon that Wretched and Barbarous Crew of Irish Rebels too to assert the King's Party Which one thing is sufficient evidence how much you are both a Fool and a Knave and how you out-do almost all Mankind in Villany Impudence and Madness who scruple not to implore the Loyalty and Aid of an execrable People devoted to the Slaughter whom the King himself always abhorr'd or so pretended to have any thing to do with by reason of the guilt of so much innocent Blood which they had contracted And that very perfidiousness and Cruelty which he endeavoured as much as he could to conceal and to clear himself from any suspition of you the most villanous of Mortals as fearing neither God nor Man voluntarily and openly take upon your self Go on then undertake the Kings Defence at the Encouragement and by the Assistance of the Irish You take care and so you might well lest any should imagine that you were about to bereave Cicero or Demosthenes of the praise due to their Eloquence by telling us before hand that you conceive you ought not to speak like an Orator 'T is wisely said of a Fool you conceive you ought not to do what is not in your Power to do and who that knows any thing of you ever expects any thing like an Orator from you Who neither uses nor is able to publish any thing that 's Elaborate Distinct or has so much as Sense in it but like a second Crispin or that little Grecian Tzetzes so you do but write a great deal take no pains to write well nor could write any thing well though you took never so much pains This Cause shall be argued say you in the hearing and as it were before the Tribunal of all Mankind That 's what we like so well that we could now wish we had a discreet and intelligent Adversary and not such a hair-brain'd Blunderbuss as you to deal with You conclude very Tragically like Ajax in his Raving I will proclaim to Heaven and Earth the Injustice the Villany the Perfidiousness and Cruelty of these Men and will deliver them over convicted to all Posterity O Flowers that such a witless senseless Bawler one that was born but to spoil or transcribe good Authors should think himself able to writ any thing of his own that will reach Posterity Whom together with his frivolous Scribles the very next Age will bury in Oblivion unless this Defence of the King perhaps may be beholden to the Answer I give to it for being looked into now and then And I would entreat the Illustrious States of Holland to take off their Prohibition and suffer the Book to be publickly sold For when I have detected the Vanity Ignorance and Falshood that it is full of the farther it spreads the more effectually it will be supprest Now let us hear how he Convicts us A DEFENCE OF THE People of England CHAP. I. I Persuade my self Salmasius that you being a vain flashy man are not a little proud of being the King of Great Britain's Defender who himself was stil'd the Defender of the Faith For my part I think you deserve your titles both alike for the King defended the Faith and you have defended him so that betwixt you you have spoil'd both your Causes which I shall make appear throughout the whole ensuing Discourse and particularly in this very Chapter You told us in the 12th Page of your Preface that so good and so just a cause ought not to be embelisht with any flourishes of Rhetorick that the King needed no other defence than by a bare Narrative of his Story and yet in your first Chapter in which you had promised us that bare Narrative you neither tell the Story aright nor do you abstain from making use of all the skill you have in Rhetorick to set it off So that if we must take your own judgment we must believe the King's Cause to be neither good nor just But by the way I would advise you not to have so good an opinion of your self for no body else has so of you as to imagin that you are able to speak well upon any subject who can neither play the part of an Orator nor an Historian nor express your self in a stile that would not be ridiculous even in a Lawyer but like a Mountebank's Jugler with big swelling words in your Preface you rais'd our expectation as if some mighty matter were to ensue in which your design was not so much to introduce a true Narrative of the King's Story as to make your own empty intended flourished go off the better For being now about to give us an account of the matter of fact you find your self encompassed and affrighted with so many Mâ—nstâ—rs of Novelty that y' are at a loss what to say first what next and what last of all I le tell ye what the matter is with you In the first place you find your self affrighted and astonish'd at your own monstrous Lies and then you find that empty head of yours not encompass'd but carried round with so many trifles and fooleries that you not only now do not but never did know what was â—it to â—e spoken and in what method Among the mâ—…y 〈◊〉 that you find in expressing the â—â—inousness of so 〈◊〉 a piece of impiety this one offers iâ— self you say which 〈◊〉 â—…y 〈◊〉 and must often be repeated to wit that the Sâ—◠〈◊〉 self never bâ—hâ—ld a more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But by your good leave Sir the Sun has beheld many things that blind Bernard never saw But we are content you should mention the Sun over and over And it will be a piece of Prudence in you so to do For though our wickedness does not require it the coldness of the 〈◊〉 that you are making does The original of Kings you say is as ancient as that of the Sun May the Gods and Goddesses Damasippus bless thee with an everlasting Solstice that thou maist always be warm thou that canst not stir a foot without the Sun Perhaps you would avoid the imputation of being called a Doctor Umbraticus But alas you are in perfect darkness that make no difference betwixt a Paternal power and a Regal and that when you had called Kings Fathers of their Country could fancy that with that Metaphor you had persuaded us that whatever is applicable to a Father is so to a King Alas there 's a great difference betwixt them Our Fathers begot us Our King made not us but we him Nature has given Fathers to us all but we our selves appointed our own King So that the people is not for the King but the King for them We bear with a Father though he be harsh and severe and so we do with
such a Case ought to do and ceas'd to be a King Suppose he should have refused to go out of the Temple and lay down the Government and live alone and had resolved to assert that Kingly Right of not being subject to any Law do you think the Priests and the People of the Jews would have suffered the Temple to be â—…d the Laws violated and live themselves in danger of the Infection It seems there are Laws against a 〈◊〉 King but none against a Tyrant Can any Man possibly be â—o mad and foolish as to fancy that the Laws should â—o far provide for the Peoples Health as tho some noisome Distemper should seize upon the King himself yet to prevent the Infection 's reaching them and make no Provision for the Security of their Lives and Estates and the very being of the whole State against the Tyranny of a cruel unjust Prince which is incomparably the greater mischief of the two But say you there can be no president shown of any one King that has been arâ—aigned in a Court of Justice and 〈…〉 to dye Sichardus answers that well enough â—is all one says he as if one should argue on this manner The Emperor of Germany never was 〈◊〉 to appear before one of the Prince-Electors therefore if the Prince Elector Palatine should Impeach 〈…〉 he were not bound to plead to it tho it appears by the Golden Bull that Charles the 〈◊〉 subjected himself and his Successors to that cognizance and Jurisdiction But no wonder if Kings were indulged in their Ambition and their Exorbitances passed by when the 〈…〉 corrupt and depraved that even private 〈◊〉 if they had either Money or Interest might 〈◊〉 the Law the guilty 〈…〉 of never so high 〈…〉 That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that you speak of that 〈…〉 upon any other and acâ—… Earth which you say is pecuâ—… of Sovereign Princes Aristotle 〈…〉 Book of his 〈◊〉 Câ— 10. calls a most Tyrannical Form of Government and not in the least to be endured by a 〈◊〉 People And that Kings are not liable to be questioned for their Actions you prove by the 〈◊〉 of a very Worthy Author that Barbaâ—… Tyrant Mark 〈◊〉 one of those that subverted 〈◊〉 Commonwealth of Râ—me And yet he himself when he undertook an Expedition against the 〈◊〉 summon'd Herod before him to answer to a Chaâ—ge of Murder and would have punished him 〈◊〉 that Herod brib'd him So that Anthony's â—…ing this Prerogative Royal and your Defence of King Charles come both out of one and the same Spring And 't is very reasonable say you that it should be so for Kings derive their Authority from God alone What Kings are those I pray that do so For I deny that there ever were any such Kings in the World that derived their Authority from God alone Saul the first King of Israel had never reign'd but that the People desired a King even against the Will of God and tho he was proclaimed King once at Mizpah yet after that he lived a private Life and look'd to his Fathers Cattel till he was created so the second time by the People at Gilgal And what think ye of David Tho he had been anointed once by God was he not anointed the second time in Hebron by the Tribe of Judah and after that by all the People of Israel and that after a mutual Covenant betwixt him and them 2 Sam. 5. 1 Chron. 11. Now a Covenant lays an Obligation upon Kings and restrains them within Bounds Solomon you say succeeded him in the throne of the Lord and was acceptable to all men 1 Chron. 29. So that 't is something to be well-pleasing in the Eyes of the People Jehoiadah the Priest made Joash King but first he made him and the People enter into a Covenant to one another 2 Kings 11. I confess that these Kings and all that reign'd of David's Posterity were appointed to the Kingdom both by God and the People but of all other Kings of what Country soever I affirm that they are made so by the People only nor can you make it appear that they are appointed by God any otherwise than as all other things great and small are said to be appointed by him because nothing comes to pass without his Providence So that I allow the Throne of David was in a peculiar manner call'd The throne of the Lord whereas the Thrones of other Princes are no otherwise God's than all other things in the World are his which if you would you might have learnt out of the same Chapter Ver. 11 12. Thine O Lord is the greatness c. for all that is in the Heaven and in the Earth is thine Both riches and honour come of thee and thou reignest over all And this is so often repeated not to puff up Kings but to put them in mind tho they think themselves Gods that yet there is a God above them to whom they owe whatever they are and have And thus we easily understand what the Poets and the Essenes among the Jews mean when they tell us That 't is by God that Kings reign and that they are of Jupiter for so all of us are of God we are all his Off-spring So that this universal Right of Almighty God's and the Interest that he has in Princes and their Thrones and all that belongs to them does not at all derogate from the Peoples Right but that notwithstanding all this all other Kings not particularly and by name appointed by God owe their Soveraignty to the People only and consequently are accountable to them for the management of it The truth of which Doctrine tho the Common People are apt to flatter their Kings yet they themselves acknowledge whether good ones as Sarpedon in Homer is described to have been or bad ones as those Tyrants in Hâ—race 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Glaucus in Lycia we 're ador'd like Gods What makes 'twixt us and others so great odds He resolves the Question himself Because says he we excel others in Heroical Virtues Let us fight manfully then says he lest our Country-men tax us with Sloth and Cowardize In which words he intimates to us both that Kings derive their Grandeur from the People and that for their Conduct and Behaviour in War they are accountable to them Bad Kings indeed tho to cast some Terror into Peoples minds and beget a Reverence of themselves they declare to the World that God only is the Author of Kingly Government in their Hearts and Minds they reverence no other Deity but that of Fortune according to that passage in Horace Te Dacus asper te profugi Schythae Regumque matres barbarorum Purpurei metuunt Tyranni Injurioso ne pede proruas Stantem columnam neu populus frequens Ad arma cessantes ad arma Concitet imperiumque frangat All barb'rous People and their Princes too All Purple Tyrants honour you The very wandring Scythians do Support the Pillar
from all humane Jurisdiction and reserved them to his own Tribunal only Let us now consider whether the Gospel preach up any such Doctrine and enjoyn that blind obedience which the Law was so far from doing that it commanded the contrary let us consider whether or no the Gospel that Heavenly Promulgation as it were of Christian Liberty reduce us to a condition of Slavery to Kings and Tyrants from whose imâ—… rule even the old Law that Mistress of Slavery 〈…〉 the people of God when it obtained Your â—…ent you take from the person of Christ himself But alas who does not know that he put 〈◊〉 into the condition not of a private person only but even of a servant that we might be made free Nor is this to be understood of some internal spiritual liberty only how inconsistent else would that Song of his Mothers be with the design of his coming into the world He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their heart he hath put down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble and meek How ill suited to their occasion would these expressions be if the coming of Christ rather established and strengthened a Tyrannical Government and made a blind subjection the duty of all Christians Himself having been born and lived and died under a Tyrannical Government has thereby purchased Liberty for us As he gives us his Grace to submit patiently to a condition of Slavery if there be a necessity of it so if by any honest ways and means we can rid our selves and obtain our Liberty he is so far from restraining us that he encourageth us so to do Hence it is that St. Paul not only of an Evangelical but a Civil Liberty says thus 1 Cor. 7. 21. Art thou called being a servant care not for it but if thou maist be made free use it rather you are bought with a price be not ye servants of men So that you are very impertinent in endeavouring to argue us into Slavery by the example of our Saviour who by submitting to such a condition himself has confirmed even our Civil Liberties He took upon him indeed in our stead the form of a servant but he always retained his purpose of being a deliverer and thence it was that he taught us a quite other notion of the right of Kings than this that you endeavour to make good You I say that preach up not Kingship but Tyranny and that in a Commonwealth by enjoyning not a necessary only but a Religious subjection to whatever Tyrant gets into the Chair whether he come to it by Succession or by Conquest or chance or any how And now He turn your own weapons against you and oppose you as 〈◊〉 to do with your own Authorities When the Collectors of the Tribute-money came to Christ for Tribute in Galilee he asked Peter Mat. 17. Of whom the Kings of the earth took custom or tribute of their own â—…dren or of strangers Peter saith unto him Of strangers 〈◊〉 saith unto him then are the children free notwithstanding lest we should offend them c give unto them for thee and for me Expositors differ upon this place whom â—â—is Tribute was paid to some say it was 〈◊〉 to the Priests for the use of the Sanctuary others that it was paid to the Emperour I am of opinion that it was the Revenue of the Sanctuary but paid to Herad who perverted the Institution of it and took it to himself Josephus mentions divers sorts of Tribute which he and his Sons exacted all which Aâ—…ppa afterwards remitted And this very Tribute though small in it self yet being accompanied with many more was a heavy burden the Jews even the poorest of them in the time of their Commonwealth paid a 〈◊〉 so that it was some considerable oppression that our Saviour spoke of and from hence he took occasion to Tax Herod's Injustice under whose Government and within whose Jurisdiction he then was in that whereas the Kings of the Earth who aâ—…ct usually the Title of Fathers of their Country do not use to oppress their own Children that is their own natural born Subjects with heavy and unreasonable Exactions but lay such burdens upon strangers and conquer'd enemies he quite contrary opprâ—ssed not strangers but his own people But let what will be here meant by Children either natural born Subjects or the Children of God and those the Elect only or Christians in general as St. Augustine understands the place this is certain that if Peter was a child and therefore free then by consequence we are so too by our Saviour's own Testimony either as Englishmen or as Christans and that consequently it is not the right of Kings to exact heavy Tributes from their own Countrymen and those freeborn Subjects Christ himself professeth that he paid not this Tribute as a thing that was due but that he might not bring trouble upon himself by offending those that demanded it The work that he came into this World to do was quite of another Nature But if our Saviour deny that it is the Right of Kings to burden their Free-born Subjects with grievous Exactions he would certainly muchless allow it to be their Right to Spoil Massacre and Torture their own Country-men and those Christians too He discoursed after such a manner of the Right of Kings that those that he spoke to suspected his Principles as laying too great a restraint upon Sovereignty and not allowing the License that Tyrants assume to themselves to be the Rights of Kings It was not for nothing that the Pharisees put such Questions to him tempting him and that at the same time they told him that he regarded not the Person of any Man nor was it for nothing that he was angry when such Questions were proposed to him Matth. 22. If one should endeavour to ensuare you with little Questions and catch at your Answers to ground an Accusation against you upon your own Principles concerning the Right of Kings and all this under a Monarchy would you be angry with him You 'd have but very little reason 'T is evident That our Saviours Principles concerning Government were not agreeable to the Hamour of Princes His Answer too implies as much by which he rather turn'd them away than instructed them He asked for the Tribute-money Whose Image and Superscription is it says he They tell him it was Caesar's Give then to Caesar says he the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's And how comes it to pass that the People should not have given to them the things that are theirs Render to all men their dues says St. Paul Rom. 13. So that Caesar must not ingross all to himself Our Liberty is not Caesar's 't is a Blessing we have received from God himself 't is what we are born to to lay this down at Caesar's feet which we derive not from him which we are not beholden to him for were an unworthy Action and
a degrading of our very Nature If one should consider attentively the Countenance of a Man and enquire after whose Image so noble a Creature were framed would not any one that heard him presently make answer That he was made after the Image of God himself Being therefore peculiarly God 's own and consequently things that are to be given to him we are intirely free by Nature and cannot without the greatest Sacrilege imaginable be reduced into a Condition of Slavery to any Man especially to a wicked unjust cruel Tyrant Our Saviour does not take upon him to determine what things are God's and what Caesar's he leaves that as he found it If the piece of Money which they shewed him was the same that was paid to God as in Vespatian's time it was then our Saviour is so far from having put an end to the Controversy that he has but entangl'd it and made it more perplext than it was before for 't is impossible the same thing should be given both to God and to Caesar But you say he intimates to them what things were Caesar's to wit that piece 〈◊〉 Money because it bore the Emperor's Stamp and what of all that How does this advantage your Cause You get not the Emperor or to your self a Penny by this Conclusion Either Christ allowed no-nothing at all to be Caesar's but that piece of Money that he then had in his hand and thereby asserted the Peoples Interest in every thing else or else if as you would have us understand him he affirms all Money that has the Emperor's stamp upon it to be the Emperor 's own He contradicts himself and gives the Magistrate a property in every Man's Estate when as he himself paid his Tribute-money with a Protestation that it was more than what either Peter or himself was bound to do The ground you rely on is very weak for Money bears the Prince's Image not as a token of its being his but of its being good Metal and that none may presume to Counterfeit it If the writing Princes Names or setting their Stamps upon a thing vest the property of it in them 't were a good ready way for them to invade all Property Or rather if whatever Subjects have be absolutely at their Prince's disposal which is your Assertion that piece of Money was not Caesar's because his Image was stampt on it but because of Right it belonged to him before 't was coyn'd So that nothing can be more manifest than that our Saviour in this place never intended to teach our Duty to Magistrates he would have spoke more plainly if he had but to reprehend the Malice and Wickedness of the hypocritical Pharisees When they told him that Herod laid wait to kill him did he return an humble submissive Answer Go tell that Fox says he c. intimating that Kings have no other Right to destroy their Subjects than Foxes have to devour the things they prey upon Say you He suffered Death under a Tyrant How could he possibly under any other But from hence you conclude that he asserted it to be the Right of Kings to commit Murder and act Injustice You 'd make an excellent Moralist But our Saviour tho he became a Servant not to make us so but that we might be free yet carried he himself so with Relation to the Magistracy as not to ascribe any more to them then their due Now let us come at last to enquire what his Doctrine was upon this Subject The Sons of Zâ—bedee were ambitious of Honour and Power in the Kingdom of Christ which they persuaded themselves he would shortly set up in the World he reproves them so as withal to let all Christians know what Form of Civil Government he desires they should settle amongst themselves Ye know says he that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and they that are great exercise authority upon them but it shall not be so among you but whosover will be great among you let him be your Minister and whosoever will be chief among you let him be your servant Unless you 'd been distracted you could never have imagined that this place makes for you and yet you urge it and think it furnishes you with an Argument to prove that our Kings are absolute Lords and Masters over us and ours May it be our fortune to have to do with such Enemies in War as will fall blind-fold and naked into our Camp instead of their own as you constantly do who alledge that for your self that of all things in the World makes most against you The Israelites asked God for a King such a King as other Nations round about them had God dissuaded them by many Arguments which our Saviour here gives us an Epitomy of You know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise Dominion over them But yet because the Israelites persisted in their desire of a King God gave them one tho in his Wrath. Our Saviour lest Christians should desire a King such a one at least as might Rule as he says the Princes of the Gentiles did prevents them with an Injunction to the contrary but it shall not be so among you What can be said plainer than this That stately imperious Sway and Dominion that Kings use to exercise shall not be amongst you what specious Titles soever they may assume to themselves as that of Benefactors or the like But he that will be great amongst you and who is greater than the Prince let him be your Servant So that the Lawyer whoever he be that you are so smart upon was not so much out of the way but had our Saviour's own Authority to back him when he said that Christian Princes were indeed no other than the Peoples Servants 't is very certain that all good Magistrates are so Insomuch that Christians either must have no King at all or if they have that King must be the People's Servant Absolute Lordship and Christianity are inconsistent Moses himself by whose Ministry that seviler Oeconomy of the old Law was instituted did not exercise an Arbitrary Haughty Power and Authority but bore the burden of the People and carried them in his Bosom as a Nursing Father does a sucking Child Numb 11. and what is that of a Nursing Father but a Ministerial Imployment Plato would not have the Magistrates called Lords but Servants and Helpers of the People nor the People Servants but Maintainers of their Magistrates because they give Meat Drink and Wages to their Kings themselves Aristotle calls the Magistrates Keepers and Ministers of the Laws Plato Ministers and servants The Apostle calls them Ministers of God but they are Ministers and Servants of the People and of the Laws nevertheless for all that the Laws and the Magistrates were both created for the good of the People And yet this is it that you call the Opinion of the Fanatick-Mastiffs in England I should not have thought the People of England were Mastiff dogs
much as in them lay and petition'd the Emperor that the People of the Jews might be govern'd without a King Caesar was moved at their entreaty and did not appoint a King over them but a Governour whom they called an Ethnarch When that Governor had presided ten years over Judea the People sent Ambassadors again to Rome and accused him of Tyranny Caesar heard them graciously sent for the Governour condemn'd him to perpetual Exile and banished him to Vienna Answer me now That People that accused their own Princes that desir'd their Condemnation that desir'd their Punishment would not they themselves rather if it had been in their Power and that they might have had their choice would not they I say rather have put them to Death themselves You do not deny but that the People and the Nobles often took up Arms against the Roman Deputies when by their Avarice or their Cruelty their Government was burdensome and oppressive But you give a ridiculous reason for this as all the rest of yours are You say They were not yet accustomed to the Yoak very like they were not under Alexander Herod and his Son But say you they would not raise War against Caius Caesar nor Petronius I confess they did not and they did very prudently in abstaining for they were not able Will you hear their own words upon that occasion We will not make War say they because we cannot That thing which they themselves acknowledge they refrain'd from for want of Ability you false Hypocrite pretend they abstain'd from out of Religion Then with a great deal of toil you do just nothing at all for you endeavour to prove out of the Fathers tho you had done it as superficially before that Kings are to be prayed for That good Kings are to be pray'd for no Man denies nay and bad ones too as long as there are any hopes of them so we ought to pray for Highway-men and for our Enemies But how Not that they may Plunder Spoil and Murder us but that they may repent We pray both for Thieves and Enemies and yet whoever dreamt but that it was lawful to put the Laws in execution against one and to fight against the other I value not the Egyptian Liturgy that you quote but the Priest that you mention who prayed that Commodus might succeed his Father in the Empire did not pray for any thing in my opinion but Imprecated all the mischiefs imaginable to the Roman State You say that we have broken our faith which we engaged more than once in solemn Assemblies to preserve the Authority and Majesty of the King But because hereafter you are more large upon that subject I shall pass it by in this place and talk with you when you come to it again You return then to the Fathers concerning whom take this in short Whatever they say which is not warranted by the Authority of the Scriptures or by good reason shall be of no more regard with me than if any other ordinary man had said it The first that you quote is Tertullian who is no Orthodox Writer notorious for many errors whose authority if he were of your opinion would stand you in no stead But what says he he condemns Tumults and Rebellions So do we But in saying so we do not mean to destroy all the peoples Rights and Priviledges all the Authority of Senates the Power of all Magistrates the King only excepted The Fathers declaâ—m against Seditions rashly raised by the giddy heat of the multitude they speak not of the inferior Magistrates of Senates of Parliaments encouraging the people to a lawful opposing of a Tyrant Hence Ambrose whom you quote Not to resist says he but to weep and to â—igh these are the Bulwarks of the Priesthood what one is there of our little number who dares say to the Emperor I do not like your Laws This is not allowed the Priests and shall Lay-men pretend to it 'T is evident of what sort of persons he speaks viz. of the Priests and such of the people as are private men 〈◊〉 of the Magistrates You see by how weak and pre 〈◊〉 a reason he lighted a Torch as it were to the distentions that were afterwards to arise betwixt the Lâ—ity and the Clergy concerning even Civil i.e. Temporal Laws But because you think you press hardest upon us with the Examples of the Primitive Christians who though they were harassed as much as a people could be yet you say they never took up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Emperour I will make it appear in the first place that for the most part they could 〈◊〉 â—…ondly that whenever they could they did And thirdly that whether they did or did not they 〈◊〉 such a sort of people as that their example deâ—… 〈◊〉 to have little sway with us First therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can be ignorant of this that when the Com 〈◊〉 of Rome expired the whole and Soverignâ— power in the Empire was setled in the Empe 〈◊〉 that all the Soldier were under his Pay in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if the whole Body of the Senate the E 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all the common people had endea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a change they might have made way for a 〈◊〉 of themselves but could not in any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then lost Liberty for the Empire would 〈◊〉 have 〈◊〉 though they might per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so lucky as to have kill'd the Emperour This being 〈◊〉 what could the Christians do 't is true there were a great many of them but they were dispersed they were generally persons of mean quality and but of small interest in the world How many of them would one Legion have been able to keep in awe Could so inconsiderable a body of men as they were in those days ever expect to accomplish an Enterprize that many famous Generals and whole Armies of tried Soldiers had lost their lives in attempting when about three hundred years after our Saviour's Nativity which was near upon twenty years before the Reign of Constantine the Great when Diâ—clesian was Emperour there was but one Christian Legion in the whole Roman Empire which Legion for no other reason than because it consisted of Christians was slain by the â—est of the Army at a Town in France called Octodurum The Christians say you conspir'd not with Cassius with Albinus with Niger and does Tertullian think they merited by not being willing to lose their lives in the quarrels of Inndels 'T is evident therefore that the Christians could not free themselves from the yoke of the Roman Emperours and it could be no ways advantagious to their interest to conspire with Infidels as long as Heathen Emperors reign'd But that afterwards the Christians made War upon Tyrants and defended themselves by force of Arms when there was occasion and many times revenged upon Tyrants their Enormities I am now about to make appear In the first place Constantite being a Christian made War upon Lacinius and cut him oâ—â— who was his
were turned into so many Tyrannies and the Subjects began to conspire the Death of their Governors neither were they the profligate sort sort that were the Authors of those Designs but the most Generous and Magnanimous I could quote many 〈◊〉 like passage but I shall instance in no more 〈…〉 Philosophers you appeal to the Poets and 〈…〉 willing to follow you thither Aeschylus 〈…〉 to inform us That the Power of the Kings of 〈…〉 as not to be liable to the censure of any 〈…〉 questioned before any Human Judicature â—…gedy that is called The Suppliants calls 〈…〉 Argives a Governor not obnoxious to th◠〈…〉 any Tribunal But you must know for 〈…〉 you say the more you discover your rashness and want of judgment you must know I say that one is not to regard what the Poet says but what person in the Play speaks and what that person says for different persons are introduced sometimes good sometimes bad sometimes wise men sometimes fools and such words are put into their mouths as it is most proper for them to speak not such as the Poet would speak if he were to speak in his own person The Fifty Daughters of Danaus being banished out of Egypt became Suppliants to the King of the Argives they begg'd of him that he would protect them from the Egyptians who pursued them with a Fleet of Ships The King told them he could not undertake their Protection till he had imparted the matter to the people For says he if I should make a promise to you I should not be able to perform it unless I consult with them first The Women being Strangers and Suppliants and fearing the uncertain suffrages of the people tell him That the Power of all the people resides in him alone that he judges all others but is not judged himself by any He answers I have told you already That I cannot do this thing that you desire of me without the peoples consent nay and tho I could I would not At last he refers the matter to the people I will assemble the people says he and persuade them to protect you The people met and resolved to engage in their quarrel insomuch that Danaus their Father bids his Daughters be of good cheer for the people of the Countrey in a Popular Convention had voted their Safeguard and Defence If I had not related the whole thing how rashly would this impertinent Ignoramus have determined concerning the Right of Kings among the Grecians out of the mouths of a few Women that were Strangers and Suppliants tho the King himself and the History be quite contrary The same thing appears by the story of Orestes in Euripides who after his Father's Death was himself King of the Argives and yet was called in question by the people for the death of his Mother and made to plead for his Life and by the major suffrage was condemned to dye The same Poet in his Play called The Suppliants declares That at Athens the Kingly Power was subject to the Laws where Theseus then King of that City is made to say these words This is a free City it is not governed by one man the people reigns here And his Son Demophoon who was King after him in another Tragedy of the same Poet called Hâ—raclidae I do not exercise a Tyrannical power over them as if they were Barbarians I am upon other terms with them but if I do them Justice they will do me the like Sophocles in his Oedipus shows That anciently in Thebes the Kings were not absolute neither Hence says Tiresias to Oedipus I am not your Slave And Creon to the same King I have some Right in this City says he as well as you And in another Tragedy of the same Poet called Antigone Aemon tells the King That the City of Thebes is not govern'd by a single person All men know that the Kings of Lacedemon have been arraigned and sometimes put to death judicially These instances are sufficient to evince what Power the Kings in Greece had Let us consider now the Romans You betake your self to that passage of C. Memmius in Salust of Kings having a liberty to do what they list and go unpunished to which I have given an answer already Salust himself says in express words That the Ancient Government of Rome was by their Laws tho the Name and Form of it was Regal which form of Government when it grew into a Tyranny you know they put down and changed Cicero in his Oration against Piso Shall I says he account him a Consul who would not allow the Senate to have any Authority in the Common-wealth Shall I take notice of any man as Consul if at the same there be no such thing as a Senate when of old the City of Rome acknowledged not their Kings if they acted without or in opposition to the Senate Do you hear the very Kings themselves at Rome signified nothing without the Senate But say you Romulus governed as he listed and for that you quote Tacitus No wonder The Government was not then established by Law they were a confus'd multitude of strangers more like than a State and all mankind lived without Laws before Governments were setled But when Romulus was dead tho all the people were desirous of a King not having yet experienced the sweetness of Liberty yet as Livy informs us The Soveraign Power resided in the People so that they parted not with more Right than they retained The same Author tells us That that same Power was afterwards extorted from them by their Emperours Servius Tullius at first reigned by fraud and as it were a Deputy to Tarquinius Priscus but afterward he referred it to the people Whether they would have him reign or no At last says Tacitus he became the Author of such Laws as the Kings were obliged to obey Do you think he would have done such an injury to himself and his Posterity if he had been of opinion that the Right of Kings had been above all Laws Their last King Tarquinius Superbus was the first that put an end to that custom of consulting the Senate concerning all Publick Affairs for which very thing and other enormities of his the people deposed him and banished him and his Family These things I have out of Livy and Cicero than whom you will hardly produce any better Expositors of the Right of Kings among the Romans As for the Dictatorship that was but Temporary and was never made use of but in great extremities and was not to continue longer than six months But that thing which you call the Right of the Roman Emperors was no Right but a plain downright Force and was gained by War only But Tacitus say you that lived under the Government of a single person writes thus The Gods have committed the Sovereign Power in human Affairs to Princes only and have left to Subjects the honour of being obedient But you tell us not where Tacitus has these
themselves of the Ignoranceâ— and Infirmity of Humane Nature they have conveyed this Doctrine down to Posterity as the foundation of all Laws which likewise all our Lawyers admit That if any Law or Custom be contrary to the Law of God of Nature or of Reason â—â—ought to be looked upon as null and void Whence it follows that tho it were possible for you to discover any Statute or other publick Sanction which ascribed to the King a Tyrannical Power since that would be repugnant to the Will of God to Nature and to right Reason you may learn from that general and primary Law of ours which I have just now quoted that it will be null and void But you will never be able to find that any such Right of Kings has the least Foundation in our Law Since it is plain therefore that the Power of Judicature was originally in the People themselves and that the People never did by any Royal Law part with it to the King for the Kings of England neither use to judge any Man nor can by the Law do it otherwise than according to Laws settled and agreed to Fleta Book 1. Cap. 17. It follows that this Power remains yet whole and entire in the People themselves For that it was either never committed to the House of Peers or if it were that it may lawfully be taken from them again you your self will not deny But It is in the King's Power you say to make a Village into a Burrough and that into a City and consequently the King does in effect create those that constitute the Commons House of Parliament But I say that even Towns and Burroughs are more Ancient than Kings and that the People is the People tho they should live in the open Fields And now we are extreamly well pleased with your Anglicisms COUNTY COURT THE TURNE HUNDREDA you have quickly learnt to count your hundred Jacobusses in English Quis expedirit Salmasio suam HUNDREDAM Picamque docuit verba nostra conari Magister artis venter Jacobaei Centum exulantis viscera marsupii Regis Quod si dolâ—si spes refulserit nummi Ipse Antichristi modò qui Primatum Papae Minatus uno est dissipare sufflatu Cantabit ultrò Cardmalitium melos Who taught Salmasius that French chatt'ring Pye To aim at English and HUNDRED A cry The starving Rascal flusht with just a Hundred English Jacobusses HUNDRED A blunder'd An out-law'd King 's last stock A hundred more Would make him Pimp for th' Anchristian Whore And in Rome ' s praise employ his poyson'd Breath Who threatn'd once to stink the Pope to death The next thing you do is to trouble us with a long Discourse of the Earls and the Barons to show that the King made them all which we readily grant and for that reason they were most commonly at the King's beck and therefore we have done well to take care that for the future they shall not be Judges of a free People You affirm That the Power of calling Parliaments as often as he pleases and of dissolving them when he pleases has belonged to the King time out of mind Whether such a vile mercenary Foreigner as you who transcribe what some Fugitives dictate to you or the express Letter of our own Laws are more to be credited in this matter we shall enquire hereafter But say you there is another argument and an invincible one to prove the Power of the Kings of England Superior to that of the Parliament the King's Power is perpetual and of course whereby he administers the Government singly without the Parliament that of the Parliament is extraordinary or out of course and limited to particulars only nor can they Enact any thing so as to be binding in Law without the King Where does the great force of this argument lye in the words of course and perpetual Why many inferior Magistrates have an ordinary and perpetual power those whom we call Justices of Peace Have they therefore the Supreme Power and I have said already that the King's Power is committed to him to take care by interposing his Authority that nothing be done contrary to Law and that he may see to the due observation of our Laws not to top his own upon us and consequently that the King has no Power out of his Courts nay all the ordinary power is rather the proples who determine all Controversies themselves by Juries of Twelve Men. And hence it is that when a Malefactor is asked at his Arraignment How will you be tried he answers always according to Law and Custom by God and my Country not by God and the King or the King's Deputy But the authority of the Parliament which indeed and in truth is the Supreme power of the people committed to that Senate if it may be called Extraordinary it must be by reason of its Eminence and Superiority else it is known they are called Ordines and therefore cannot properly be said to be extra ordinem out of order and if not actually as they say yet vertually they have a perpetual power and authority over all Courts and ordinary Magistrates and that without the King And now it seems our barbarous terms grate upon your Critical ears forsooth whereas if I had leisure or that it were worth my while I could reckon up so many Barbarisms of yours in this one Book as if you were to be chastiz'd for them as you deserve all the School-boys Ferulers in Christendom would be broken upon you nor would you receive so many Pieces of Gold as that wretched Poet did of old but a great many more Boxes o' th' ear You say 'T is a Prodigy more monstrous than all the most absurd Opinions in the world put together that the Bedlams should make a distinction betwixt the King's Power and his Person I will not quote what every Author has said upon this subject but if by the words Personam Regis you mean what we call in English the Person of the King Chrysostome who was no Bedlam might have caught you that it is no absurd thing to make a distinction betwixt that and his power for that Father explains the Apostles command of being subject to the Higher Powers to be meant of the thing the Power it self and not of the Persons of the Magistrates And why may not I say that a King who acts any thing contrary to Law acts so far forth as a private person or a Tyrant and not in the capacity of a King invested with a Legal Authority If you do not know that there may be in one and the same man more Persons or Capacities than one and that those Capacities may in thought and conception be severed from the man himself you are altogether ignorant both of Latin and Common sense But this you say to absolve Kings from all sin and guilt and that you may make us believe that you are gotten into the Chair voâ—r self which you have pull'd the Pope
our Northern Counties and kept Garisons in the best Towns of those Parts and had the King himself in Custody whilest they likewise encouraged the tumultuating of those of their own Faction who did more than threaten the Parliament both in City and Country and through whose means not only a Civil but a War with Scotland too shortly after brake out If it has been always accounted praise-worthy in private Men to assist the State and promote the publick Good whether by Advice or Action our Army sure was in no fault who being ordered by the Parliament to come to Town obey'd and came and when they were come quell'd with ease the Faction and Uproar of the King's Party who sometimes threatned the House it self For things were brought to that pass that of necessity either we must be run down by them or they by us They had on their side most of the Shopkeepers and Handicrafts-men of London and generally those of the Ministers that were most factious On our side was the Army whose Fidelity Moderation and Courage were sufficiently known It being in our Power by their means to retain our Liberty our State our Common-safty do you think we had not been fools to have lost all by our negligence and folly They who had had places of Command in the Kings Army after their Party were subdued had laid down their Arms indeed against their Wills but continued Enemies to us in their hearts and they flock'd to Town and were here watching all opportunities of renewing the War With these Men tho they were the greatest Enemies they had in the World and thirsted after their Blood did the Presbyterians because they were not permitted to exercise a Civil as well as an Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over all others hold secret Correspondence and took measures very unworthy of what they had formerly both said and done and they came to that Spleen at last that they would rather enthral themselves to the King again than admit their own Brethren to share in their Liberty which they likewise had purchased at the price of their own Blood they chose rather to be Lorded over once more by a Tyrant polluted with the Blood of so many of his own Subjects and who was enraged and breath'd out nothing but revenge against those of them that were left than endure their Brethren and Friends to be upon the square with them The Independents as they are called were the only men that from first to last kept to their point and knew what use to make of their Victory They refus'd and wisely in my opinion to make him King again being then an Enemy who when he was their King had made himself their Enemy Nor were they ever the less averse to a Peace but they very prudently dreaded a new War or a perpetual slavery under the name of a Peace To 〈◊〉 our Army with the more reproaches you begin a silly confused Narrative of our Affairs in which tho I find many things false many things frivolous many things laid to our charge for which we rather merit yet I think it will be to no purpose for me to write a true relation in answer to your false one For you and I are arguing not writing Histories and both sides will believe our reasons but not our narrative and indeed the nature of the things themselves is such that they cannot be related as they ought to be but in a set History so that I think it better as Salust said of Carthage Rather to say nothing at all than to say but a little of things of this weight and importance Nay and I scorn so much as to mention the praises of great men and of Almighty God himself who in so wonderful a course of Affairs ought to be frequently acknowledged amongst your Slanders and Reproaches I 'le therefore only pick out such things as seem to have any colour of argument You say the English and Scotch promised by a Solemn Covenant to preserve the Majesty of the King But you omit upon what terms they promised it to wit if it might consist with the safety of their Religion and their Liberty To both which Religion and Liberty that King was so averse to his last breath and watcht all opportunities of gaining advantages upon them that it was evident that his life was dangerous to their Religion and the certain ruin of their Liberty But then you fall upon the King's Judges again If we consider the thing aright the conclusion of this abominable action must be imputed to the Independents yet so as the Presbyterians may justly challenge the glory of its beginning and progress Hark ye Presbyterians what good has it done you how is your Innocence and Loyalty the more cleared by your seeming so much to abhor the putting the King to death You your selves in the opinion of this everlasting talkative Advocate of the King your accuser went more than half-way towards it you were seen acting the fourth Act and more in this Tragedy you may justly be charged with the King's death since you ban'd the way to it 't was you and only you that laid his head upon the Block Wo be to you in the first place if ever Charles his Posterity recover the Crown of England assure your selves you are like to be put in the Black List But pay your Vows to God and love your Brethren who have delivered you who have prevented that calamity from falling upon you who have saved you from inevitable ruin tho against your own wills You are accused likewise for that some years ago you endeavoured by sundry Petitions to lessen the Kings authority that you publisht some scandalous expressions of the King himself in the Papers you presented him with in the name of the Parliament to wit in that Declaration of the Lords and Commons of the 26th of May 1642 you declar'd openly in some mad Positions that breath'd nothing but Rebellion what your thoughts were of the King's authority Hotham by order of Parliament shut the Gates of Hull against the King you had a mind to make a trial by this first act of Rebellion how much the King would bear What could this man say more if it were his design to reconcile the minds of all English men to one another and alienate them wholly from the King for he gives them here to understand that if ever the King be brought back they must not only expect to be punisht for his Father's death but for the Petitions they made long ago and some acts that past in full Parliament concerning the putting down the Common-Prayer and Bishops and that of the Triennial Parliament and several other things that were Enacted with the greatest consent and applause of all the people that could be all which will be look'd upon as the Seditions and mad Positions of the Presbyterians But this vain fellow changes his mind all of a sudden and what but of late when he considered it aright
scorn to have Charles compared with so cruel a Tyrant as Nero he resembled him extremely much For Nero likewise often threatned to take away the Senate Besides he bore extreme hard upon the Consciences of good men and compelled them to the use of Ceremonies and Superstitious Worship borrowed from Popery and by him re-introduced into the Church They that would not conform were imprisoned or Banisht He made War upon the Scots twice for no other cause than that By all these actions he has surely deserved the name of a Tyrant once over at least Now I 'le tell you why the word Traytor was put into his Indictment When he assured his Parliament by Promises by Proclamations by Imprecations that he had no design against the State at that very time did he List Papists in Ireland he sent a private Embassie to the King of Denmark to beg assistance from him of Arms Horses and Men expresly against the Parliament and was endeavouring to raise an Army first in England and then in Scotland To the English he promised the Plunder of the City of London to the Scots that the four Northern Counties should be added to Scotland if they would but help him to get rid of the Parliament by what means soever These Projects not succeeding he sent over one Dillon a Traytor into Ireland with private Instructions to the Natives to fall suddenly upon all the English that inhabited there These are the most remarkable instances of his Treasons not taken up upon hear-say and idle reports but discovered by Letters under his own Hand and Seal And finally I suppose no man will deny that he was a Murderer by whose order the Irish took Arms and put to death with most exquisite Torments above a hundred thousand English who lived peaceably by them and without any apprehension of danger and who raised so great a Civil War in the other two Kingdoms Add to all this that at the Treaty in the Isle of Wight the King openly took upon himself the guilt of the War and clear'd the Parliament in the Confession he made there which is publickly known Thus you have in short why King Charles was adjudged a Tyrant a Traytor and a Murderer But say you why was he not declared so before neither in that Solemn League and Covenant nor afterwards when he was delivered to them either by the Presbyterians or the Independents but on the other hand was receiv'd as a King ought to be with all reverence This very thing is sufficient to persuade any rational man that the Parliament entred not into any Councils of quite deposing the King but as their last refuge after they had suffered and undergone all that possibly they could and had attempted all other ways and means You alone endeavour maliciously to lay that to their charge which to all good men cannot but evidence their great Patience Moderation and perhaps a too long forbearing with the King's Pride and Arrogance But in the month of August before the King suffered the House of Commons which then bore the only sway and was governed by the Independants wrote Letters to the Scots in which they acquainted them that they never intended to alter the form of Government that had obtain'd so long in England under King Lords and Commons You may see from henâ—e how little reason there is to ascribe the deposing of the King to the principles of the Independents They that never used to dissemble and conceal their Tenents even then when they had the sole management of affairs profess That they never intended to alter the Government But if afterwards a thing came into their minds which at first they intended not why might they not take such a course tho before not intended as appear'd most advisable and most for the Nation 's Interest Especially when they found that the King could not possibly be intreated or induced to assent to those just demands that they had made from time to time and which were always the same from first to last He persisted in those perverse sentiments with respect to Religion and his own Right which he had all along espoused and which were so destructive to us not in the least altered from the man that he was when in Peace and War he did us all so much mischief If he assented to any thing he gave no obscure hints that he did it against his will and that whenever he should come into power again he would look upon such his Assent as null and void The same thing his Son declared by writing under his hand when in those days he ran away with part of the Fleet and so did the King himself by Letters to some of his own Party in London In the mean time against the avowed sense of the Parliament he struck up a private Peace with the Irish the most barbarous Enemies imaginable to England upon base dishonourable terms but whenever he invited the English to Treaties of Peace at those very times with all the power he had and interest he could make he was preparing for War In this case what should they do who were intrusted with the care of the Government Ought they to have betrayed the safety of us all to our most bitter Adversary Or would you have had them leâ—â— us to undergo the Calamities of another Seven years War not to say worse God put a better mind into them of preferring pursuant to that very solemn League and Covenant their Religion and Liberties before those thoughts they once had of not rejecting the King for they had not gone so far as to vote it all which they saw at last tho indeed later than they might have done could not possibly subsist as long as the King continued King The Parliament ought and must of necessity be entirely free and at liberty to provide for the good of the Nation as occasion requires nor ought they so to be wedded to their first Sentiments as to scruple the altering their minds for their own or the Nation 's good if God put an opportunity into their hands of procuring it But the Scots were of 〈…〉 opinion for they in a Letter to Charles the King's Son call his Father a most Sacred Prince and the putting him to death a most execrable Villany Do not you talk of the Scots whom you know not we know them well enough and know the time when they called that same King a most â—…rable person a Murtherer and Traytor and the putting a Tyrant to Death a most sacred action Then you pick holes in the King's Charge as not being properly penn'd and you ask why we needed to call him a Traytor and a Murtherer after we had stiled him a Tyrant since the word Tyrant includes all the Crimes that may be And then you explain to us grammatically and critically what a Tyrant is Away with those Trisles you Pedagogue which that one definition of Aristotle's that has lately beeen cited will utterly confound
the Government of England into a Tyranny thought he could not bring it to pass till the Flower and Strength of the Military Power of the Nation were cut off Another of his Crimes was the causing some words to be struck out of the usual Coronation-oath before he himself would take it Unworthy and abominable Action The Act was wicked in it self what shall be said of him that undertakes to justifie it For by the Eternal God what greater breach of Faith and Violation of all Laws can possibly be imagin'd What ought to been more sacred to him next to the Holy Sacraments themselves than that Oath Which of the two do you think the more flagitious Person him that offends against the Law or him that endeavours to make the Law equally guilty with himself Or rather him who subverts the Law it self that he may not seem to offend against it For thus that King violated that Oath which he ought most religiously to have sworn to but that he might not seem openly and publickly to violate it he craftily adulterated and corrupted it and least he himself should be accounted perjur'd he turn'd the very Oath into a Perjury What other could be expected then that his Reign would be full of Injustice Craft and Misfortune who began it with so detestable an Injury to his People And who durst pervert and adulterate that Law which he thought the only Obstacle that stood in his way and hindred him from perverting all the rest of the Laws But that Oath thus you justify him lays no other Obligation upon Kings then the Laws themselves do and Kings pretend that they will be bound and limited by Laws tho indeed they are altogether from under the Power of Laws Is it not prodigious that a Man should dare to express himself so sacrilegiously and so senselesly as to assert that am Oath sacredly sworn upon the Holy Evangelists mary be dispensed with and set aside as a little insignifi cant thing without any Cause whatsoever Charles himself refutes you you Prodigy of Impiety Who thinking that Oath no light matter chose rather by a Subterfuge to avoid the force of it or by a Fallacy to elude it than openly to violate it and would rather falsifie and corrupt the Oath then manifestly forswear himself after he had taken it But The King indeed swears to his People as the People do to him but the People swear Fidelity to the King not the King to them Pretty Invention Does not he that promises and binds himself by an Oath to do any thing to or for another oblige his Fidelity to them that require the Oath of him Of a truth every King swâ—ears Fidelity and Service and Obedience to the People with respect to the performance of whatever he promiseth upon Oath to do Then you run back to William the Conqueror who was forced more than once to swear to perform not what he himself would bâ—…t what the People and the great Men of the Realm requir'd of him If many Kings are Crown'd without the usual Solemnity and Reign without taking any Oath the same thing may be said of the People a great many of whom never took the Oath of Allegiance If the King by not taking an Oath be at Liberty the People are so too And that part of the People that has sworn swore not to the King only but to the Realm and the Laws by which the King came to his Crown and no otherwise to the King than whâ—…st he should act according to those Laws that the Common People that is the House of Commons should chuse quas Vulgus elegerit For it were folly to alter the Phrase of our Law and turn it into more genuine Latin This Clause Quas Vulgus elegerit Which the Commons shall abuse Charles before he was Crown'd procured to be razed out But say you without the King's assent the People can chuse no Laws and for this you cite two Statutes viz. Anno 37 H. 6. Cap. 15. and 13 Edw. 4. Cap. 8. but those two Statutes are so far from appearing in our Statute-books that in the years you mention neither of those Kings enacted any Laws at all Go now and complain That those Fugitives who pretended to furnish you with matter out of our Statutes imposed upon you in it and let other People in the mean time stand astonish'd at your Impudence and Vanity who are not asham'd to pretend to be throughly vers'd in such Books as it is so evident you have never look'd into nor so much as seen And that Clause in the Coronation-Oath which such a brazen-fac'd Brawler as you call fictitious The King's Friends you say your self acknowledge that it may possibly be extant in some Ancient Copies but that it grew into disuse because it had no convenient signification But for that very reason did our Ancestors insert it in the Oath that the Oath might have such a signification as would not be for a Tyrant's conveniency If it had really grown into disuse which yet is most false there was the greater need of reviving it but even that would have been to no purpose according to your Doctrine For that Custom of taking an Oath as Kings now-adays generally use it is no more you say then a bare Ceremony And yet the King when the Bishops were to be put down pretended that he could not do it by reason of that Oath And consequently that reverend and sacred Oath as it serves for the Kings turn or not must be solemn and binding or an empty Ceremony Which I earnestly entreat my Country-men to take notice of and to consider what manner of a King they are like to have if he ever 〈◊〉 back For it would never have entred into the thoughts of this Rascally-foreign Grammarian to write a Discourse of the Rights of the Crown of England unless both Charles Stuart now in Banishment and tainted with his Fathers Principles and those Prosâ—igate Tutors that he has along with him had induâ—uiously to suggested him what they would have writ They dictated to him That the whole Parliament were liable to be proceded against as Traitors because they declar'd without the Kings Assent all them to be Traitors who had taken up Arms against the Parliament of England and that the Parliaments were but the King's Vassals That the Oath which our Kings take at their Coronations is but a Ceremony And why not that a Vassal too So that no reverence of Laws no sacredness of an Oath will be sufficient to protect your Lives and Fortunes either from the Exorbitance of a furious or the Revenge of an exasperated Prince who has been so instructed from his Cradle as to think Laws Religion nay and Oaths themselves ought to be subject to his Will and Pleasure How much better is it and more becoming your selves if you desire Riches Liberty Peace and Empire to obtain them assuredly by your own Virtue Industry Prudence and Valour than to long after