to say what has been above proved that the Text it self proves the contrary and in the other the Words and Sense are directly against it 37. But our A says Noah was the sole Heir of the World why should it be thought that God would disinherit him of his Birth-right-Heir indeed in England signifies the Eldest Son who is by the Law of England to have all his Fathers Land but where God ever appointed any such Heir of the World our A would have done well to have shewed us and how God disinherited him of his Birth-right or what harm was done him if God gave his Sons a Right to make use of a part of the Earth for the support of themselves and Families when the whole was not only more then Noah himself but infinitely more then they all could make use of and the Possessions oâ— one could not at all Prejudice or as to any use straighten that of the other 38. Our A probably foreseeing he might not be very successful in perswading People out of their Senses and say what he could Men would be apt to believe the plain words of Scripture and think as they saw that the Grant was spoken to Noah and his Sons joyntly He comes 2â— to insinuate as if this grant to Noah conveyed no Property no Dominion because Subduing the Earth and Dominion over the Creatures are therein omitted nor the Earth once named And therefore says he there is a considerable difference between these two Texts the first blessing gave Adam a Dominion over the Earth and all Creatures the latter allows Noah Liberty to use the Living Creatures for Food here is no alteration or diminishing of his Title to a Property of all things but an Enlargment only of his Commons O. 211. so that in our A s Sense all that was said here to Noah and his Sons gave them no Dominion no Property but only Enlarged the Commons their Commons I should say since God says to you are they given though our A says his for as for Noahs Sons they it seems by Sr. Robt's appointment during their Fathers Life time were to keep Fasting days 39. Any one but our A would be mightily suspected to be blinded with Prejudice that in all this Blessing to Noah and his Sons could see nothing but only an Enlargment of Commons For as to Dominion which our A thinks omitted the fear of you and the dread of you says God shall be upon every Beast which I suppose expresses the Dominion or Superiority was designed Man over the living Creatures as fully as may be for in that fear and dread seems cheifly to consist what was given to Adam over the inferior Animals who as Absolute a Monarch as he was could not make bold with a Lark or a Rabbit to satisfie his hunger and had the Herbs but in common with the Beasts as is plain from 1 Gen. 2. 9. and 30. In the next place 't is manifest that in this Blessing to Noah and his Sons Property is not only given in clear words but in a larger extent then it was to Adam Into your hands they are given says God to Noah and his Sons which words if they give not Property nay Property in Possession 't will be hard to find words that can since there is not a way to express a Mans being possessed of any thing more Natural nor more certain then to say it is delivered into his hands And verse 3 d to shew that they had then given them the utmost Property Man is capable of which is to have a right to destroy any thing by using it every moving thing that Liveth saith God shall be Meat for you which was not allowed to Adam in his Charter This our A calls a Liberty of using them for Food and only an Enlargment of Commons but no alteration of Property O. 211. What other Property Man can have in the Creatures but the Liberty of using them is hard to be understood So that if the first Blessing as our A says gave Adam Dominion over the Creatures and the Blessing to Noah and his Sons gave them such a Liberty to use them as Adam had not it must needs give them something that Adam with all his Sovereignty wanted something that one would be apt to take for a greater Property for certainly he has no Absolute Dominion over even the Brutal Part of the Creatures and the Property he has in them is very narrow and scanty who cannot make that use of them which is permitted to another should any one who is Absolute Lord of a Country have bidden our A Subdue the Earth and given him Dominion over the Creatures in it but not have permitted him to have taken a Kid or a Lamb out of the flock to satisfie his hunger I guess he would scarce have thought himself Lord or Proprietor of that Land or the Cattel on it but would have found the difference between having Dominion which a Shepherd may have and having full Property as an owner so that had it been his own Case Sr. Rob. I believe would have thought here was an Alteration nay an Enlarging of Property and that Noah and his Children had by this Grant not only Property given them but such a Property given them in the Creatures as Adam had not for however in respect of one another Men may be allowed to have Propriety in their distinct portions of the Creatures yet in respect of God the maker of Heaven and Earth who is sole Lord and Proprietor of the whole World Mans Propriety in the Creatures is nothing but that Liberty to use them which God has permitted and so mans Property may be altered and Enlarged as we see it was here after the Flood when other uses of them are allowed which before were not from all which I suppose it is clear that neither Adam nor Noah had any Private Dominion any Property in the Creatures exclusive of his posterity as they should successively grow up into need of them and come to be able to make use of them 40. Thus we have examined our A s Argument for Adams Monarchy founded on the Blessing Pronounced 1 Gen. 28. Wherein I think 't is impossible for any sober Reader to find any else but the setting of Mankind above the other kinds of Creatures in this habitable Earth of ours 'T is nothing but the giving to man the whole Species of man as the chief inhabitant who iâ— the Image of his Maker the Dominion over the other Creatures This lies so obvious in the plain words that any one but our A would have thought it necessary to have shewn how these words that seem'd to say the quite contrary gave Adam Monarchical Absolute Power over other Men or the Sole Propriety in all the Creatures and me thinks in a business of this moment and that whereon he Builds all that follows he should have done something more then barely cite words which apparently make against him
when free to put himself into Subjection to another for his own harm though where he finds a good and a wise Ruler he may not perhaps think it either necessary or useful to set precise Bounds to his Power in all things Prerogative can be nothing but the Peoples permitting their Rulers to do several things of their own free choice where the Law was silent and sometimes too against the direct Letter of the Law for the publick good and their acquiescing in it when so done For as a good Prince who is mindful of the trust put into his hands and careful of the good of his People cannot have too much Prerogative that is Power to do good So a weak and ill Prince who would claim that Power his Predecessors exercised without the direction of the Law as a Prerogative belonging to him by Right of his Office which he may exercise at his pleasure to make or promote an Interest distinct from that of the publick gives the People an occasion to claim their Right and limit that Power which whilst it was exercised for their good they were content should be tacitly allowed 165. And therefore he that will look into the History of England will find that Prerogative was always largest in the hands of our wisest and best Princes Because the People observing the whole tendency of their Actions to be the publick good or if any humane frailty or mistake for Princes are but Men made as others appear'd in some small declinations from that end yet 't was visible the main of their Conduct tended to nothing but the care of the publick The People therefore finding reason to be satisfied with these Princes whenever they acted without or contrary to the Letter of the Law acquiesced in what they did and without the least complaint let them inlarge their Prerogative as they pleased judging rightly that they did nothing herein to the prejudice of their Laws since they acted conformable to the Foundation and End of all Laws the publick good 166. Such God-like Princes indeed had some Title to Arbitrary Power by that Argument that would prove Absolute Monarchy the best Government as that which God himself governs the Universe by because such Kings partake of his Wisdom and Goodness Upon this is founded that saying That the Reigns of good Princes have been always most dangerous to the Liberties of their People For when their Successors managing the Government with different Thoughts would draw the Actions of those good Rulers into Precedent and make them the Standard of their Prerogative as if what had been done only for the good of the People was a right in them to do for the harm of the People if they so pleased It has often occasioned Contest and sometimes publick Disorders before the People could recover their original Right and get that to be declared not to be Prerogative which truly was never so since it is impossible any body in the Society should ever have a right to do the People harm though it be very possible and reasonable that the People should not go about to set any Bounds to the Prerogative of those Kings or Rulers who themselves transgressed not the Bounds of the publick good For Prerogative is nothing but the Power of doing publick good without a Rule 167. The Power of calling Parliaments in England as to precise time place and duration is certainly a Prerogative of the King but still with this trust that it shall be made use of for the good of the Nation as the exigencies of the Times and variety of Occasion shall require For it being impossible to foresee which should always be the fittest place for them to assemble in and what the best season the choice of these was left with the Executive Power as might be best subservient to the publick good and best suit the ends of Parliaments 168. The old Question will be asked in this matter of Prerogative But who shall be Judge when this Power is made a right use of I answer Between an Executive Power in being with such a Prerogative and a Legislative that depends upon his will for their convening there can be no Judge on Earth As there can be none between the Legislative and the People should either the executive or the Legislative when they have got the Power in their hands design or go about to enslave or destroy them The People have no other remedy in this as in all other cases where they have no Judge on earth but to appeal to Heaven For the Rulers in such attempts exercising a Power the people never put into their hands who can never be supposed to consent that any body should rule over them for their harm do that which they have not a right to do And where the Body of the People or any single Man are deprived of their Right or are under the Exercise of a power without right having no Appeal on earth they have a liberty to appeal to Heaven when-ever they judge the Cause of sufficient moment And therefore though the People cannot be Judge so as to have by the Constitution of that Society any Superiour power to determine and give effective Sentence in the case yet they have reserv'd that ultimate Determination to themselves which belongs to all Mankind where there lies no Appeal on Earth by a Law antecedent and paramount to all positive Laws of Men whether they have just Cause to make their Appeal to Heaven And this Judgment they cannot part with it being out of a Man's power so to submit himself to another as to give him a liberty to destroy him God and Nature never allowing a Man so to abandon himself as to neglect his own preservation And since he cannot take away his own Life neither can he give another power to take it Nor let any one think this lays a perpetual foundation for Disorder for this operates not till the Inconvenience is so great that the Majority feel it and are weary of it and find a necessity to have it amended And this the Executive Power or wise Princes never need come in the danger of And 't is the thing of all others they have most need to avoid as of all others the most perilous CHAP. XV. Of Paternal Political and Despotical Power considered together 169. THough I have had occasion to speak of these separately before yet the great mistakes of late about Government having as I suppose arisen from confounding these distinct Powers one with another it may not perhaps be amiss to consider them here together 170. First then Paternal or Parental Power is nothing but that which Parents have over their Children to govern them for the Childrens good till they come to the use of Reason or a state of Knowledge wherein they may be supposed capable to understand that Rule whether it be the Law of Nature or the municipal Law of their Countrey they are to govern themselves by Capable I
very difficult dear and dangerous 241. But farther this Question Who shall be Judge cannot mean that there is no Judge at all For where there is no Judicature on Earth to decide Controversies amongst Men God in Heaven is Judge He alone 't is true is Judge of the Right But every Man is Judge for himself as in all other Cases so in this whether another hath put himself into a State of War with him and whether he should appeal to the Supreme Judge as Iephtha did 242. If a Controversie arise betwixt a Prince and some of the People in a matter where the Law is silent or doubtful and the thing be of great Consequence I should think the proper Umpire in such a Case should be the Body of the People For in Cases where the Prince hath a Trust reposed in him and is dispensed from the common ordinary Rules of the Law there if any Men find themselves aggrieved and think the Prince acts contrary to or beyond that Trust who so proper to judge as the Body of the People who at first lodg'd that Trust in him how far they meant it should extend But if the Prince or who-ever they be in the Administration decline that way of Determination the Appeal then lies no where but to Heaven Force between either Persons who have no known Superiour on Earth or which permits no Appeal to a Judge on Earth being properly a State of War wherein the Appeal lies only to Heaven and in that State the injured Party must judge for himself when he will think fit to make use of that Appeal and put himself upon it 243. To conclude The Power that every individual gave the Society when he entered into it can never revert to the Individuals again as long as the Society lasts but will always remain in the Community because without this there can be no Community no Commonwealth which is contrary to the original Agreement so also when the Society hath placed the Legislative in any Assembly of Men to continue in them and their Successors with Direction and Authority for providing such Successors the Legislative can never revert to the People whilst that Government lasts Because having provided a Legislative with Power to continue for ever they have given up their Political Power to the Legislative and cannot resume it But if they have set Limits to the Duration of their Legislative and made this Supreme Power in any Person or Assembly only temporary Or else when by the Miscarriages of those in Authority it is forfeited upon the Forfeiture of their Rulers or at the Determination of the Time set it reverts to the Society and the People have a Right to act as Supreme and continue the Legislative in themselves or place it in a new Form or new hands as they think good FINIS * In Grants and Gifts that have their Origiginal from God or Nature as the Power of the Father hath no inferior Power of Man can limit nor make any Law of prescription against them O. 158. †The Scripture teaches that Supreme Power was Originally in the Father without any limitation O. 245. It is no improbable Opinion therefore which the Arch-Philosopher was of That the chief Person in every Houshold was always as it were a King so when Numbers of Housholds joyn'd themselves in civil Societies together Kings were the first kind of Governours amongst them which is also as it seemeth the reason why the name of Fathers continued still in them who of Fathers were made Rulers as also the ancient Custom of Governours to do as Melchizedec and being Kings to exercise the Office of Priests which Fathers did at the first grew perhaps by the same Occasion Howbeit this is not the only kind of Regiment that has been received in the World The Inconveniences of one kind have caused sundry other to be devised so that in a word all publique Regiment of what kind soever seemeth evidently to have risen from the deliberate Advice Consultation and Composition between Men judging it convenient and behovefull there being no impossibility in Nature considered by it self but that Man might have lived without any publique Regiment Hooker's Eccl. l. 1. §. 10. The publick Power of all Society is above every Soul contained in the same Society and the principal use of that power is to give Laws unto all that are under it which Laws in such Cases we must obey unless there be reason shew'd which may necessarily inforce that the Law of Reason or of God doth injoin the contrary Hook Eccl. Pol. 1. §. 16. To take away all such mutual Grievances Injuries and Wrongs i. e. such as attend Men in the state of Nature There was no way but only by growing into Composition and Agreement amongst themselves by ordaining some kind of Government publick and by yielding themselves subject thereunto that unto whom they granted Authority to rule and govern by them the Peace Tranquillity and happy Estate of the rest might be procured Men always knew that where Force and Injury was offered they might be Defenders of themselves they knew that however Men may seek their own Commodity yet if this were done with Injury unto others it was not to be suffered but by all Men and all good means to be withstood Finally they knew that no Man might in reason take upon him to determine his own Right and according to his own Determination proceed in maintenance thereof in as much as every man is towards himself and them whom he greatly affects partial and therefore that Strifes and Troubles would be endless except they gave their common Consent all to be ordered by some whom they should agree upon without which Consent there would â—e no reason that one man should take upon him to be Lord or Iudge over another Hooker's Eccl. Pol. l. 1. §. 10. At the first when some certain kind of Regiment was once appointed it may be that nothing was then farther thought upon for the manner of governing but all permitted unto their Wisdom and Discretion which were to Rule till by experience they found this for all parts very inconvenient so as the thing which they had devised for a Remedy did indeed but increase the Sore which it should have cured They saw that to live by one Man's Will became the cause of all Mens misery This constrained them to come unto Laws wherein all Men might see their Duty beforehand and know the Penalties of transgressing them Hooker's Eccl. Pol. l. 1. §. 10. Civil Law being the Act of the whole Body Politick doth therefore over-rule each several part of the same Body Hooker ibid. At first when some certain kind of Regiment was once approved it may be nothing was then further thought upon for the manner of governing but all permitted unto their Wisdom and Discretion which were to Rule till by experience they found this for all parts very inconvenient so as the thing which they had devised for a Remedy did indeed but increase the Sore which it should have cured They saw that to live by one Man's Will became the cause of all Mens misery This constrained them to come unto Laws wherein all Men might see their Duty beforehand and know the Penalties of transgressing them Hooker's Eccl. Pol. l. 1. §. 10. The lawful Power of making Laws to Command whole Politick Societies of Men belonging so properly unto the same intire Societies that for any Prince or Potentate of what kind soever upon Earth to exercise the same of himself and not by express Commission immediately and personally received from God or else by authority derived at the first from their consent upon whose persons they impose Laws it is no better than meer Tyranny Laws they are not therefore which publick approbation hath not made so Hooker's Eccl Pol. l. 1. §. 10. Of this point therefore we are to note that sith Men naturally have no full and perfect Power to Command whole politick multitudes of Men therefore utterly without our Consent we could in such sort be at no Mans Commandment living And to be commanded we do consent when that Society whereof we be a part hath at any time before consented without revoking the same after by the like universal agreement Laws therefore human of what kind soever are available by consent Ibid. Two Foundations there are which bear up publick Societies the one a natural inclination whereby all Men desire sociable Life and Fellowship the other an Order expresly or secretly agreed upon touching the manner of their union in living together the latter is that which we call the Law of a Commonweal the very Soul of a politick Body the parts whereof are by Law animated held together and set on work in such actions as the common good requireth Lawâ— politick ordain'd for external order and regiment amongst Men are never framed as they should be unless presuming the will of Man to be inwardly obstinate â—rebellious and averse from all obedience to the sacred Laws of his nature in a word unless presuming Man to be in regard of his depraved Mind little better than a wild Beast they do accordingly provide notwithstanding so to frame his outward actions that they be no hindrance unto the common good for which Societies are instituted Vnless they do this they are not perfect Hooker's Ec. Pol. l. 1. §. 10. Humane Laws are measures in respect of Men whose actions they must direct howbeit such measures they are as have also their higher Rules to be measured by which Rules are two the Law of God and the Law of Nature so that Laws humane must be made according to the general Laws of Nature and without contradiction to any positive Law of Scripture otherwise they are ill made Ibid. l. 3. § 9. To constrain Men to any thing inconvenient doth seem unreasonable Ibid. l. 1. §. 10.