for this how doth he make it good Here he useth the common practice of false accusers but I shall leave that to some other pen and why not the falshood as wel 2. Whereas in the Remonstrance the instability of the Parliament is shewed and the evil practices of the King's partie Here he saith they are too harsh and without any molifying oyl c. First 't is cleer to every man that hath sence that Mr. Sedgwick is not sometimes at home to take an account of his own soul he taxes the Army as over harsh too large in opening the faults of others whereas he pitiful man hath written six or seven sheets and all for the most part are accusations against the Army and the grossest and vilest that can be aggravated to the highest 2. That the Parliament for their sins are scattered and broken This in part is true to wit such Members as turned aside to their crooked waies the Lord hath led them forth with the workers of iniquity but peace shall be upon the rest 3. That the whol Kingdom is full of discontent against them I beleeve t is so and more discontented will they be when they shall more cleerly understand their particular treasons and bloody designs in joyning with Malignants their under-hand plottings to raise up farraign and domestick forces to destroy the Army and the wel-affected through the Kingdom 4. That the King's partie are strugling to get from under their intollerable afflictions but cannot No marvail seeing they grow worse and worse and like mastives are the fiercer for their chain and you Mr. Sedgwick seek to increase their miserie by your daubing with untempered morter prophesying peace and safty to them and that their deliverance is at hand and you know who did so Ezek. 13. by which means they are hardened and so fatted for destruction 5. To that which you say of the Army that they are not like the good Samaritan but are as flesh flies or the man possessed with Devils seek the lands ruin to the furthest As the Lord hath hitherto spoken for them cleered their innocencie in spight of Hell and maugre all the powers of darkness so he will in this present work be a witness for them and make it manifest to the world by setling a wel-grounded peace what they have desired fought for and sought after and what hard things they have suffered for the good of the Nation The Righteous shall see it and rejoyce and all iniquity shall stop her mouth We have next his Story and 't is a wofull one First he saith Once our King and Parliament or people lived quietly and lovingly together imbraced in the arms of Divine Goodness prospered together as husband and wife When was this once It is so known an untruth what he speaks as I need not say any thing to it onely wish him hereafter to pray with David set a watch O Lord before my mouth keep the door of my lips I could multiply instances of the continual dissentions and differences between King and Parliament from the beginning of his Reign down al along to this present Parliament and for the People such as were most sincere and pious lived not quietly and lovingly together with him but suffered extremly under him even to the spoiling of their goods imprisonment banishment and some losse of life and this only for the truth sake 2. In calling the King husband and the Parliament wife as the former was false so this is foolish And 3ly Is that true that the Army have alwaies lusted after the royal bed What alwaies how are they then deeply revolted and turn'd back to the world In pag. 43. you say they have been led up into the high things of God and did all things in the Spirit of God But I shall not presse it further 4. I perceive you are a stranger to the ground-work of the Treaty 't is too wonderful for you and therefore have stated the thing amisse it was to advance the King's party stop the course of Justice against Capital offenders that such as had notoriosly cheated the Kingdome might not be questioned the people brought again into their former bondage such as would not nor could in conscience submit to their Church-government and other forms might be suppressed and under the name of Sectaries banished the Kingdom Lastly you say There is a blessing in this Treaty destroy it not tell us how the Lord will come in as a thief in the night and steal away the evil I answer You may see the Lord is already come in not in the night but at noon-day and hath discovered the deceitfulness of it the snare is broken and we are escaped and blessed be the Lord who hath not given us as a prey to their teeth Mr. Sedgwick is now come to examin their Reasons given in against the Treaty and here he finds sundry faults First Because they would make their own and the puplick interest to be one Answ. 1. Howsoever such as have engaged for the publick are in some things to be considered apart and so their particular safety to be provided for yet doth it not follow that they have therefore no interest in the publick or what is offered to us by them is not the publick but their own particular interest 2. I do not well know what he means by generally the people of the Land if he intends the King's party all Papists and other malignants I confess they go not with the Remonstrance but desire rather to see all things in the condition they were in before these wars began but for others and this is properly the publick interest they are one with the Army holding fast to their first principles namely To be free from all arbitrary and tyranical power whether in King or Parliament to enjoy all their rights priviledges and liberties to have all hurtful laws and customs removed not to have their consciences lorded over by any to have justice done impartially upon offenders and such a Government to be established as most tends to a publick peace and safety And therefore whereas he saith These devised things you propose the people know them not affect them less than they know them Unless by people he mean Royallists Delinquents Malignants and other treacherous plotters and their adherents it is not true for the publick doe desire them call for them and have a long time contributed their estates and engaged their persons in hope that these things would at last be procured His Second Exception is Because the Remonstrance propounds That all power should be in the hands of the Parliament and that to be certain and in the hands of a subordinate officer to call c. There is a great deal here left out which makes the matter more full and cleer but I let it passe let us consider his reasons against this It is to throw down a King and lords and to set up the people Ans. 1. The
as from Papists to Protestants from Protestants back to papists from them again to protestants as it was in Henry the eight Edward the sixth queen Mary and queen Elizabeths days but in the other the course of Religion hath no interruption by the disease of Magistrates though they change yet Religion alters not 7. Where the Government is a Free State there men are encouraged to the study of wisdom truth justice c. because not titles there but good parts make men capable of honor authority and place neither is there a door open for them to come in by bribery and flattery but chosen by their fitnesse gifts and abilities In Monarchies much preferment goes by succession the Kings cosins though fools or knaves by birth challenge great authority 8. According to the proverb new Kings new Laws hear what Bodin speaks I mention him the oftner because he is a great kingsman We commonly saith he in the changing of Princes new designs new Laws new officers new friends new enemies new habits and a new form of living for most commonly Princes take delight to change and alter all things that they may be spoken of the which doth many times cause great inconveniences not only to the subjects in particular but also to the whole body of the State de Rep. lib. 6. c. 4. But no such prejudice or peril is incident to the other form of Government whatsoever things are publickly altered it is maturely don and upon good ground and for the general profit and welfare of the people 9. This form of Government for which I stand must needs be the best being the mediocrity or mean between the two extreams Monarchy and Anarchy that one should rule alone is against that common maxime plus vident oculi quam oculus two eyes see more then one or that none should govern or al t is so absurd and sencelesse as no man pleads for it onely a malignant scandal raysed up against some honest men 10. If men would not be blind they might cleerly behold a senceable and visible hand of God against this throning of Kings specially taking in one after another by succession is Saul also à mong the Prophets but who is their Father what greater shame and dishonor can a nation lie under then to take the son of a known and apparent adultresse and make him their King what this mans wife is and what his own mother was and his fathers mother to go no higher it is fit it should be considered of no marvail God hath punished us by such a race where no zeal of God nor justice of law hath beene shewed against such open whordoms from one generation to another only talkt and laught at whereas by the Law of God open adulterers should be severely punished 11. It is worthy of remembrance what marks of Soveraignty some do reckon up as being the Rights and prerogatives proper to Monarchs I have not the time to name them now onely from them this followes undeniably that Monarchy is Tyranny I will not adde tollerable to it for granting unto Kings such Soveraignties there is nothing left the people but meer slavery and therefore people should be lesse senceable then beasts if they would remain in bondage under Monarchy being able to free themselves in a just and honorable way and to set up such a form of government whereby they might enjoy more liberty a thing not only good in it self but naturally desired by all men and deemed by the wisest more pretious then gold or pearls according to Tityrus in Virgil Libertas quae sera tamen respexit inertem Candidor post quam tondendi barba cadebat Respexit amen longo post tempore venit But here I wonder how men giving such soveraignty to Kings should prefer Monarchy before all other forms of government it is as plain contradiction grosse ignorance and base flatery as a thing can be 12. I desire also the Reader to take notice that for the Reasons which are brought in favour of Monarchy they may be thus answered 1. Whatsoever is said for the usefulnesse of it not only may be the very same be said of the other but much more and better as tending to the publick good and profit 2. Touching their similitudes taken from God the body a family bees cranes c. there is nothing can be more gathered from them as applyed to the matter in hand but that the Commonwealth should be carefully looked unto 3. For the antiquity of Monarchies I grant them to be of a long standing though later then the other Josephus makes Cain to be the author but it is generally held that Nemrod was the first man and by other Tyrants after him held up with great violence rapine and bloodshed And whereas it hath enlarged it self far and neer and lasted long this I mind to be a judgment of God layd upon the nations of the earth to scourge them for their impieties and great wickednesse against the King of Kings 13. Touching the things objected against the form of Government which I plead for they are either taken upon misunderstanding or very frivolous and not worth the answering neverthelesse we shall shortly speak somthing thereto But for the present this shall suffice Onely let me acquaint thee Reader before I break off which is That all such as prefer Monarchy before the other kind of Government do it with distinction for though they hold the former in the nature of the thing to be more excellent then the later yet in this they all agree that as certain conditions may be in respect of times places and persons the Government here defended is more necessary and usefull Now what reason and cause there is for us to change Monarchy into a free State in reference to this present time the place our persons and condition I leave the same to the two great Counsels of the Land to consider of Imprimatur G. M.
at the sudden discharge of a peece of Ordnance behinde his back who otherwise having time to collect and summon his spirits would not fear to stand at the mouth of a charged Cannon in a good cause Thus it is with the godly and so it seems to be the Armies case a sudden gust or storme comming unawares startled them But since the Lord having drawn up their spirits filled what was empty and laid in promises on their hearts of his presence and protection Now they fear not what man can do but in the strength of God are resolved to break through all difficulties go forward in spight of all opposition hold their own and stand fast in the work making this use and advantage of their former slip to look the better to their steps and walkings and seek in their actings Gods glory the more The Second thing is The Covenant which oblieges to the preservation of the Kings Person and Authority Here as his manner is he takes out of the Remonstrance some pieces and broken sentences as that clause page 55. In the preseruation of true Religion and Liberty of the Kingdom so page 57. If it have an evil sense it cals for repentance 't was betwixt man and man Page 59. And after saith he you would exclude God from being any thing but a witness Before I come to his answer I shal propound some few things to the Readers consideration 1. A Covenant though lawfully made yet if afterwards it cannot be performed without sin in such case it binds not neither may it be kept For it is a truth without dispute we may not do evil that good may come thereof 2. That Covenant is not binding where the condition or thing is not performed upon which the promise or tye was made For instance the people oblieging themselves to preserve the Person of the King and His Authority intended withall their own Safety Liberties Rights upon this ground I say they Covenanted namely the publick safety seeing therefore the publick good is inconsistant with the preservation of his person and authority that covenant binds not for when something is promised for such a cause and afterward is found not to be that promise is void so Amesius 3. If men either implicitely or knowingly bind themselves to breake any Law of God or rule of justice in such a case the ingagement holds not specially in that particular and so farre as that clause extendeth To apply it if men oblige themselves to preserve the Kings Person and Authority c. and God in the mean time cals for justice their obligation must give place to his commandment But it will be objected how Joshua and the Elders of the Jews kept covenant with the Gibeonites Joshua 9. howsoever devoted to destruction I answer that covenant was lawfull see Deut. 2.26 Josh. 11.19 23. Judg. 2.12.14 2 Sam. 21.1 2.29 14. Deut. 20.10 By all which places it appeareth that they onely of the Canaanites were devoted to destruction who did not seek for peace for if they would sue for it upon these conditions to wit abjure their idolatry embrace the true religion of the Jews and submit themselves their land good and all they had to their dominion it was to be granted them Fourthly It is no binding oath when either there wants power and right in the administrator or the persons taking it are not capable of the thing put upon them and here to speake my minde freely I have not yet seen a cleer ground either for the one or other touching that covenant Fifthly Take notise when persons enter into covenant about things out of their power and right such covenants are neither lawfull nor to be kept I would willingly know what was meant by the preservation of the Kings person and authority whether notwithstanding all the tyranny and oppression he should commit it was yet intended to preserve him from justice and to keep him in his place of government if so then it was an unlawfull covenant protestation oath because they had no right or power to doe such a thing it being a thing against the Law of God nature and nations and so went beyond their bounds But if in taking it it was intended by preserving the person of the King his authority c. so far as it should be agreeable to justice law conscience it was tolerable and no otherwise These things premised the lesse will serve in reply to his answer 1. To that he saith God put the preservation of the Kings life and authority into the covenant on purpose to save him after all his sufferings Answ 1. This is onely his saying and we may deny it with as much reason truth and authority 2. If God save him not he means a temporall salvation or else speaks impertinently then he put him not into the covenant for such a purpose for Gods counsel and purpose shall stand But 3. Charity thinks no evil it is the rule of love when speeches or actions are doubtfull in themselves and in their report and may be taken either well or ill alwayes to interpret them in the best part The preservation of the Kings person is in the covenant but how if we will judge charitably seeing nothing is explained it is thus the covenanters intended the glory of God in the Kings preservation that is oblieged themselves so far as it be lawfull and honorable Secondly That oaths and covenants should be the main pillars of humane societies we grant but there is one thing which you still want and that makes you to erre namely distinctions doe you mean all covenants and oaths I desire to think better of you and that your meaning is onely just ones but howsoever hereafter learn to make distinction and it will prevent much stumbling in you 3. That these are the last and perillous times spoken of 2 Tim. 3 1. we will take it so and doe observe your Greek {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} accusers you speak also of applying that text you need not goe farre to make application for certaine if your pamphlet were divided into ten parts nine of the ten would be found vile slanders and false accusations It may be the Lord will smite you and make your heart tender for it Mr. Sedgwick by this time is neer come to the proposals that the Person of the King may be brought to justice but before he takes of that he tels us This is a strange remedy against civill wars to lay aside treating Answ 1. We may well desire to have that laid aside which we assuredly know was devised and carried on to the prejudice and hurt of the publick and so a remedy worse then the disease 2. You mistake your self to say treating is laid aside for t is neither so nor so unlesse you will say that a sick man layes aside the meanes and remedy of health when he refuseth bloody and murderous mountebancks and quacksalvers and make choise of honest able and
them after the fathers death should he be a fool a knave a madman a tyrant either such a thing was never meant or if it were ever so such people therein shewed themselves either to be fools knaves madmen or children as doing a thing against all reason all right the manifest law of God and very light of nature And this we further add That whatsoever covenants or contracts have been between former Kings and our Ancestors about succession and what acts of Parliament laws statutes they have made about it they are no way binding to us neither are we thereto related or concern'd in the same If two men make a contract together that the son of the one shall marry the others daughter if these children be under age they have liberty and power especially their fathers being dead to do as they think good being come to age neither doth that pre-contract binde them but they are still free and may dispose of themselves as they see good that is they have liberty and power to marry any other if they see it more convenient and necessary So I confidently affirm whatsoerer Crown Contract hath been made by our forefathers in our non-age pitch where you will touching this succession we have our liberty to take or refuse and are in point of conscience no more bound to crown the heir of William the Conquerer Henry the Eight James the Sixt of Scotland or this King Charles than any other man but if we will to be like other nations still have a King such then is our liberty and freedome now that we may yea and ought to elect and crown such a one whom we shall find to be best qualified and fittest for us Now we come to the next general Head That Kings are and ought to be bound by Lawes and are not to be exempted from them I shall not at this time shew the flattery and vanity of some Sycophants and Parasites who affirm that people may not prescribe any law to their Prince that Kings are above law Now touching that senselesse distinction of Bodin and others who hold that the Supream Magistrate howsoever bound to the laws of God of Nature and Nations yet are free from all Civil laws prescribed by themselves nor that Court destinction between Law directive and coactive what Kings should doe and what Kings may do This I say with Pareus Superior Magistratus est subjectus legibus divinis suae republicae The supream Magistrate is subject to Gods laws and to the lawes of his own Common-wealth Comment in Rom. C. 13. dub 6. yea more strictly obliged to observe his own lawes than subjects and departing from the law becomes a Tyrant and therefore the whole kingdom which is above the King may not only bind him by laws but question him and punish him for the breach of them And this is a most certain truth howsoever by some slavish pens opposed that all Kings are so far bound to the laws and customs of their kingdoms that if they violate and alter them at their pleasure they may truly be called Tyrants according to Aristotle and herein absolve their people from their aleagence which they have made unto them Take for instance the united Netherland Provences who for this very cause did declare Philip King of Spain to have fallen and cut himselfe off from the Seignorie of the Netherlands and caused a new form of an oath to be drawn in manner of an abjuration of the King of Spain every one swearing duty and obedience unto the Estates by the publick officers and magistrates of every town and province the which thing was and still is by all Protestants and reformed Churches justified and approved lawful I could here set down many such examples of other Nations who by their lawes required their Kings to be subject to their lawes aswell as any other yea all nations except where tyrants have reigned have alwaies had some lawe to restrain their kings from excesses and abusive courses Besides all good Emperours and Kings in all ages have professed and practised the same Trajan acknowledged that the Prince was not above law and giving the Sword to any Praetor or Cōmander he would say Hoc gladio contra me utitur si in rempublicam peccavero The like said Theodosius and Valentinian Emperours Digna est vox Majestate regnantis in legibus alligatum se Principem profiteri lib. 4. cap. d. leg. prin So Antiochus the Third King of Asia is commended that he writ to all the Cities of his kingdom If there should be any thing in his letters which should seem contrary to the Laws they should not obey them These men knew it is God only that may do in heaven and in earth what he pleaseth as for man whether Emperour or King he is under law and therefore must do nothing but what is lawfull just and right And for more authentick proofe we could produce the Kings of Israel and Judah who had no arbitrary power to do what they pleased nor exempted from laws but inferiour too and obliged by them as well as subjects this is evident by sundry impregnable texts Deut. 17.18 19. Josh. 1.1.8 1 Sam. 8.11 to 19. and 12. 14 15.20 c. Ezek. 46.18 The Jewish Doctors from these words I will visit their transgression with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of men 2 Sam. 7. write that it was a custom in Israel If their Kings transgressed against the law of the King they were to be scourged for it But the question is not so much whether Kings are under law for this now begins now to be generally granted but the question is If Kings do break law what 's their punishment and who shal do it The answer to this belongs properly to the next point yet something I shall say to it in this place For my part I have not yet seen in any mans writing new or old though never so great a Kings-man any cleer and convincing reason that seeing Kings are subject to laws both the law of God and of men wherfore they should have any immunity or be priviledged from punishment appointed by law to such and such offences more than other men Plainly thus If King or Prince be a Murderer a Traytor a Pirate an Adulterer perjured c. why the punishment due to other murderers traytors c. and for the like crimes inflicted upon them should not be executed upon the other King or Prince what the custom hath been or what partial laws foolish ignorant men have made I count as nothing let reason justice Divine precepts be considered Hence let us take light and information First as for the law of God it goes generally and takes all in quisquis siquis quicunque whosoever if any man what mansoever if a murderer an adulterer c. let him die the death Kings and Princes are not here exempted And Secondly In the point of Justice 't is
grievous crimes and miscarriages with his partie not having any thing at all to gainsay the truth of the relation to vilifie and reproach the reporters 5. In sending us to his book we take good notic of it and what he there saith of the rich mercy to the King and his party and from it do observe how extremly he is carried away with vain fancies and publishing idle dreams to the world The Spirit speaketh expresly clearly and with fulness of certainty which evidently demonstrates that in these things he speaks not by the Spirit of God seeing his words fall to the ground In page 19. he begins to take into consideration some grounds laid down in the Remonstrance why the King is not to be received again to peace nor restored to his Office and dignity and promiseth to let them see how much their injustice is against God and themselves in that which they profess for justice 1. Saith he you insist upon this pag. 24. God hath given him so cleerly into your hands to do justice and afterward God hath given a double judgment against him c. and pag. 5. God makes hast to judgment and hath appeared at a severe avendger To this his answer is The King is the greatest sufferer in the kingdom hath God judged him and why wil you not submit to his judgement will ye take it out of Gods hand when did God chasten or judge men then give him to men to chasten again or when did Gods people fall upon punishing after God hath done it is God weary or remisse that you would have men take it into their hands Ans. 1 It is a bad consequence because a man hath bin a great sufferer therefore no more should be inflicted God punished Phaeraoh many wayes and greatly too yet he hardening his heart had afterward heavier sorer and deeper plagues 2. Men in the execution of justice upon offenders take not judgment out of Gods hand but rather indeed are Gods hand in the work 3. When God gave in a witness against Acan that he had troubled Israel howsoever that was a Divine punishment upon him yet did the people afterwards stone him to death and so the Lord turned from the fierceness of his anger 4. What weariness or remisness in executing judgement do men impute to God who having by his providence cast into their hands a principal offender if they according to his desert proceed to justice against him The truth is in his Answer there is not one word that comes directly home to the matter for which he brings it Secondly he saith You argue page 24. no remorse appearing proportionable to the offence if that could be seen you would regard it with a proportionable tenderness towards him Again you say There is no change of heart no repentance no free nor full yeelding to all the parts of a publick and religious interest This he refutes thus Herein you destroy and deny that free mercy of God upon which you have lived a long while manifest that your profession of the Gospel was indeed but in letter not in power God loves first before we can but you must receive good before you can give you know not the heart nor can you judge of the Kings principles they are too high for you If he should turn to you he should be but seven times more the child of the Devil Howsoever Mr. Sedgwick for his own turn takes some broken pieces of the Remonstrance and toucheth not the strength of the matter yet so much he takes out as he cannot answer But to the point 1. It is agreeable to Gospel truth and walking in the power thereof for Saints upon just occasion to lay open the unrighteousness of men and to endeavour that punishment may be inflicted whether it be in an eclesiastical or civil way 2. Observe the loosness of his arguing God loves first What 's the inference therefore offenders as murderers thieves c. ought not to be punished 3. If I see and tast the fruit I can easily discern what the tree is without digging to the root He tells us page 31. The speech sheweth what is within and cites Matth. 12.34 35. hence we may undoubtedly conclude that men apparently and visibly wicked are corrupt and unfound within 4. What the King's principles are which are so mysterious and deep we search not after them his known principles are known to be dangerous and destructive to the Nation he holds them without change or amendment 5. Is Mr. Sedgwick in good earnest and speaks as he thinks that the King should be seven times more the child of the Devil if he should turn to the Army What! in a condition better than they yea seven times better surely then they are very bad In pag. 12. he saith He understands not the utmost of the religion they walk in This seems to make the accusation the more probable but many others lesse prejudiced against the Army and better principled in religion know 't is false and that they are as holy and pure in conversation as he himself howbeit with lesse noise sound not a trumpet before them as the hypocrits do Thirdly He brings in the Remonstrance arguing against the accomodation because there is no equal ballance of affairs page 24. your meaning is saith he as you often express the King's forces are wholly subdued Here he is short Noble enemies require no more but to get their enemies into their power then they shew mercy for this he brings Elisha's example 2 King 6.22 and add how the Lord never brings us down but that he might restore us and lift us up again Ans. 1. It is sometimes so far from commendation to spare an enemy gotten into our hands as that not to do justice upon him exeedingly displeaseth God To omit many instances 't is memorable in Ahab's case what sad tydings the Prophet brought him for letting Benhadad to escape Thus saith the Lord Because thou hast let go out of thy hand a man whom I appointed to utter destruction therefore thy life shall go for his life and thy people for his people 1 King 20.24 So Saul his sparing of Agag when he was in his hands was one cause that the Lord did rend the Kingdom of Israel from him Again what hath been more frequently practised by noble enemies than severity and justice upon such as they have gotten into their power who of all the Kings of Canaan taken in war by Joshua were not afterwards by his appointment put to death So Samuel did Agag and Jehu Ahaziah King of Judah 3. Touching Elisha's example in sparing the Syrians it teacheth us thus much that in our own cause we must render good for evil and if our enemy hunger feed him and from his words to the King of Israel we may gather that men used not to kill such as in the field were taken captives and stood not out in hostility But there is nothing from the place to be
thou thy self a witnesse Saith he We have all this while to justify our selves in this war said that our war was but defensive and if it prove otherwise we must repent of it Answ It is not alwayes a fault to change from a defensive to an offensive way and course A man being set upon by a highway-robber or pirate at sea may at first resolve only his owne safety and yet afterward seek to wound and kill the enemy and justly too To apply this when the war first began betweene the King and Parliament it was unknown to us what murders massacres and spoyles he would commit in and upon the land and people Again his former perfidiousnesse treacheries and destroying plots were not then so publickly and clearly understood as since and therefore no marvail there is a change from defensive to offensive seeing he hath given the cause and so no argument of lightnesse hypocrisie self-ends in persons thus changed Secondly He is large in giving out what was in their mindes when they began the war That the King and His party were wicked men not fit for the places and power they had they were Saints and no body fit to rule but they glad when the Parliment tooke armes thinke themselves the onely true Lords and except the King would become one of their Saints c. Answ It was a reason which Elias layd down why he was willing to die I am no better then my fathers for men eminent in grace gifts office c. to have things laid to their charge which they never knew it hath been practised in all ages Mr. Sedgwick is not the first that hath bent his tongue like a bow against the godly this way Tiberius on a time hearing certaine persons speaking unreverently of Augustus acquainted him therwith to whom Augustus answered let it not trouble you Tiberius that any man speaketh ill of us it is sufficient that no man is able to hurt us Gods presence with and protection for the Army is such as bad tongues cannot hurt them neither darken their splendor and beauty in the eyes of honest and godly people 3. Next he blames them in saying This miserable inconvenience of a Treaty this insnaring Treaty and because they call it a preposterous and self-deserting way pag. 27. And hence he takes occasion to tel them that they have defiled their cause count all their owne because they have fought for it they are no Saints yet he scornes that cause that is subject to ruin and destruction Answ. 1. What is said in the Remonstrance touching this last Personall Treaty is true enough for who but Malignants and Papists were the first contrivers and abetters thereof The Lord Goring in his former intercepted letters could tell us so much that if the King could cudgel the Parliament into a Treaty the King had brought his designe to perfection and t is reported of the King Himself that he should say if such a thing could be brought about then it should not be in the power of men or devils to hinder him from bringing all his designes to his own hearts desire Secondly For men to act for publick rights and to hinder wicked designes is no base and accursed way but an approved path walked in by the Saints in all former ages Thirdly It is not faith but fancie when God gives in meanes and wayes of preservation and safety not to observe the providence in the carefull use of them Fourthly He chargeth them to be of a base and poor spirit and unbecomming Christian Souldiers to speak of persons ingaged the party adhering and to think the King will be revenged on them for their eminent activity against him It is saith he a principle very destructive to continue the disturbance of a nation to save our lives afterward he shewes what he would doe himself in such a case Answ. 1. It is easily observed what is the main drift and scope of his whole dicourse in many pages here together namely a direct crossing and contradiction of Christs counsel Be ye wise as serpents and harmelesse as doves but according to his principle a man cannot be a sheep unlesse he runne himselfe into the lyons mouth nor a dove without falling purposely into the snare Because the Army to the doves innocency joyn the serpents prudence that is seek to avoyd danger so far as lawfully they may hence he cryes out Feare a snare and the pit have taken hold of you I laugh at your destruction and mock when your fear comes you are no Saints you live not in God c. as if a provident care of safety stood not with the fear of God Demosthenis upbraiding the Athenians with improvidence and incircumspection presented to them an innocent fool who being struck on the one cheek laid his hand on the place where he received the blow and being smitten on the other did the like never using either of his hands to defend himself from further blowes Such ideots and blocks Mr. Sedgwick would perswade men to be take blows and stand still and never seek to avoid the stroke though God have put means into their hands and may lawfully escape the danger But Secondly It is a great mistake of Mr. Sedgwick to think that continuance of the Army is destructive to the Kingdom and that their disbanding would be for the peoples peace good welfare he harps often upon this string whereas there is nothing more cleer than the contrary Thirdly For the rest of the answer 't is only what he hath and what he can do propounded in four heads and I passe it over if any man can make use of it much good may it do him From pag. 27. to 37. we have a tyresome discourse of two things The Armies badness and his goodness their fear his faith 1. Whereas it is in the Remonstrance We might chalenge all story for one instance in the like case howsoever he grants a good use of story yet in them it is a dull thing c. Ans. 1. I never observed this principle before Because men profess the Kingdom of Christ and have a light of truth and justice that therefore they should be uncapable of the use of former story doth Religion take off from a Christian because a Christian what is proper to every man as a man moral civil natural 2. If there be a good use of story as he grants then might they at this time well challenge it reasoning the greater to the lesse as thus If all Nations keeping their interest and proceeding according to equity and justice have upon fewer and lesser crimes refused personal treaties with their Kings and called them to an accompt and done justice upon them according to their facts there is all the reason in the world that the like be done to this King whose exorbitances and enormities are beyond most parrellel instances Enquire saith Bildad of the former age and prepare thy self to the search of the fathers for we are
but of yesterday Sundry Histories and Authors might be produced to manifest that Emperours and Kings not only have been restrained for their Tyranny and misgovernment yea for not committing the evil which this king hath done Take for instance his name sake Charles the Ninth King of France four or five several conclusions of Peace were solemnly made and ratified between the King and the Protestants but no sooner made and proclaimed but presently violated of the King and the popish party by massacres and and new treacherous plots to extirpate the Protestant party so that every accommodation proved but a seminary of a new and more bloody war almost to the utter ruin of France In the year 1592. when a publick peace was made and all differences to outward appearences buried in eternal oblivion the King contrary to his faith and Oath caused the Admiral of France the Protestants cheefe piller as he departed from the Counsel to dinner to he shot with a Harquebuze which carried away the forefinger of his right hand and wounded him in the left arm The King to colour his treachery swears with an excreation to the King of Navarre and others who complained of this outrage to take such exemplary justice on the offenders as the Admiral and his friends should have cause to rest satisfied command them to be pursued appoints three of the Parliament to make Information against them protests after this again and again to be exeedingly sorry that this Act touching His Honor that He will be revenged for it so as the memory of it should remain for ever writes to Governors of the provinces chief towns and Magistrates that He would take such order as the Authors of so wicked an Act should be known and punished And to His Ambassadors to forreign Princes That they should make it known to all the world that this Outrage did displease Him And for the Admiral's safety He commands the Captains of His Guard to give him as many of His Guard as he pleased to suffer no Papists to enter his lodging and adviseth all the Gentlemen Protestants then in Paris to lodge about the Admirals lodging But all this Court Holy-water was only to keep every bird within his own nest and a pitfal to entrap the chief of the Protestants for the same day after dinner the King and Queen mother the Duke of Guize and others take counsel to murder the Admiral and all the chief Protestants the night ensuing not only in Paris but thorow out all France whilest they were sleeping in their beds Which most tyranical barbarous Tradgedy was accordingly acted the Admiral slain in his lodging and his head cut off carried to the King and Queen mother who causing it to be embalm'd sent it to the Pope and Cardinal of Lorrain for an assurance of the death of their most capital enemy all the Protestants Noblemen and Gentlemen lodging in the Admirals quarters undergo the like Butchery the streets of Paris are strewed with Carkeises the pavements market-places and river dyed with Protestant blood about ten thousand of them being thus treacherously massacred in their beds at such a season when they thought themselves most safe and that on the Lords own sacred Day a very unsutabe time for such a bloody prophane infernal sacrifice No sooner was this matchlesse treachery of this King against his own natural subjects executed but He avowes and justifies that which he but the day before so solemnly and openly disclaimed as a means to cut off al commotions for time to come of which we shall say more in its proper place 2. He brings forth their main evil surmisings as he cals them as how apt Princes are to break such accommodations and how easie it is for them Page 29. his answer hereunto is that they are pursued with fear and wrath on every side Answ The simple beleeveth every word but the prudent man looketh well to hi◠going Do they in the Remonstrance manifest a jealousie and fear what have they now done is there not a cause for who knows not that it hath been the continual practice of all such Kings when they have quieted the people by an hypocritical and feigned yeilding to their proposals and gotten themselves into the Throne again to pick quarels make breaches and commit greater outrage and insolencies than ever they did before without regard of faith or oath Hear what Mr. Prinne saith to this thing in his Soveraign power of Parliaments Part 2. page 34. It hath been saith he the constant practice of most of our Kings as John Henry the 3. Edward and Richard the 2. with others who after war and differences with their Parliaments Lords and Commons upon ACCOMMODATIONS made between them assoon as ever they got possession of their castles Ships Ammunition seized by their Subjects break all Vowes Oathes Covenants made unto them oppressing them more than ever enlarging their own prerogatives and diminshing the subjects liberties yea taking away many of their lives against law oathes promises pardons on purpose to enthrale them which still occasioned new Commotions And a little after brings in this Observation Well then might the Royal Prophet give us this Divine caution Oh put not your trust in Princes Surely men of high degree are already laid in the ballance they are altogether lighter than vanity both in their oath and promises Again This same Mr. Prinne in the Appendix pag 74. Commends it as a Maxime held by the Nobles of Alphonso King of Castile a cruel and treacherous Prince That a Tyrant being offended will at some time revenge himself and therefore they MUST NOT TRUST HIM UPON ANY RECONCILIATION Thirdly For the rest 't is only his Prophesie touching the restitution of the King to His antient rights How his suffering hath made him a Royalist that never cared for him mark it Reader who taught him that the poor suffering oppressed King and His Partie shall have his compassion and for the Army they are upon foolish wayes hope for nothing but deceit and falshood and treachery fear compasseth them about on every side like Cain safety flyes from them God looked upon them every way with sadness and wrath and much more of this language But I have metwithit so often as I am now quite tyred out I am glad that His Excellency and the Councel of Warre can so patiently bear it t is a great adition to their goodness and largenes of spirit The Eagle being provoked by the night-crow with her clamorous noise and screeching to fight yet will not stir up to battle howsoever the crow be too weak for her And ti is attributed to a Horse as his praise and acting argueth great courage and mettle to him when dogs bark at him and run after him he will not turn against them but runs forward as if he neither saw them nor heard them although he can easily trample them under his feet· For the other particular which is a large praising of himselfe
punishment for so great an Offence And this they have since seconded in sundry other Declarations and Impeachments Fourthly For that most notorious falshood of his because his Excellency and the Councel of war crave that justice may be done to say It is the foule and black design of a few unbeleeving people I let it passe the Lord I know will rebuke him for it For as in this so in all the rest he manifests himself to be one of that number who have said with our tongue we will prevail our lips are our own who is Lord over us But for the persons upon whom you have laid so grievous an aspersion this is their comfort and rejoycing in the Lord that as God knowes their hearts so he knowes the sincerity and singlenesse of them that they look at his glory in seeking after the publick good As the clouds can neither lessen the light of the sun nor let the course thereof because at the last they are scattered by the heat of the sun which shineth out most comfortable So the innocency of their persons and justnesse of their cause shal disperse and drive away all black clouds of calumniations and the mouth of him that speaketh lies shall be stopt Now we come to the great work propounded in the Remonstrance That that Capitall and grand author of our troubles the Person of the King may be brought to Justice for the Treason Blood and Mischief he is there guilty of Here I find Mr. Sedgwick in his answer to say very little to it But 1. That no Law takes hold of the King 2. The crown is his birth-right and inheritance for the rest it is either a justification of the King as to be better then they or bitter reproaches Because this is a high subject and a businesse a foote I shall therefore speak the more largely to it not de facto but de jure for the Treason Blood c. laid to the King I shall leave that charge to others more concerned in it only I shall shew what justly and lawfully may be done in such a case And for the Readers clearer information and better understanding of the point I shall here assert 5. things First That there is a supream and Soveraigne power alwayes residing in the people above Kings Secondly That all Kings in all places and at all times have been and still are subject to and under Law Thirdly That the people have the power not onely to call their Kings to an account but to censure and remove them for their tyranny and misgovernment Fourthly That no nation is so tied to any form of civill government but that it is lawfull for the people to alter it into another form or kind upon occasion Fifthly That amongst all the formes of civil Government Aristocraticall or popular is best and safest for the people For the first That every Magistrate be he Emperor or King is inferior to the whole Kingdome and people it may plainly be demonstrated 1. Because he is not only their servant but creature too being originally created by and for them now as every creator is of greater power and authority then its creature and every cause greater then its effect so the authority and power of the people which creates the Prince and his princely power and enlargeth limits or restrains it as there is cause must needs be greater then the Prince or royal power And though Principallities as generally considered be of God yet the constitution of Princes and their severall degrees of power are meerly from men hence it is that Peter speaking of Kings and their supremacy cals them {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} every creature or ordinance of man 1 Pet. 2.13 because originally instituted limitted and continued by and for the use and service of the people whose creatures as we said ministers and servants they are and ought to be and from them receive their whole jurisdiction power and authority Besides howbeit principallities as generally considered be indeed of God yet the constitution of all Princes and their severall degrees of power are meerly from men and this cannot with any shew of reason be denied For if the regall authority of Princes were meerly from the Law of God and nature it should be the same and like it self in all Kingdomes but t is not the same and like it self in all kingdomes but as every people please and make a free choise of neverthelesse every form and kinde of government is equally lawfull and good in it self whether Monarchy Aristocratie or Democratie as all on all sides doe acknowledge 2ly It is a thing neither probable nor credible that any free people when they voluntarily incorporated themselves into Kingdomes of their own accord set up an elective King over them that there was such stupidity and madnesse in them as absolutely to resigne up their soveraign and popular power authority right to Kings and their heires for ever to give them an entire full and incontroulable supremacie over them and so to make the creature inferior to the creator the derivative greater then the primative the servants more potent then themselves and thus of free men to make themselves slaves and for their more safety to be more enslaved But the contrary appears by the peoples constant practise in all ages as we shall manifest hereafter But admit which with sence cannot be imagined that such a thing had been so yet the Fathers could not take in their posterity with them neither oblige them any way in point of equity and conscience to confirm and observe what they foolishly had done but their children afterwards might lawfully yea and ought to stand fast in the liberty which the law of God nature and nations had made them free and not be entangled in the slavish yoke and bondage of their fore-fathers Hence Amesius in his cases of Conscience lib 5. cap. 22. Qu. 2. resolves that all fatherly power is in procuring the good of children and shewes in the next cha. That liberty in naturall estimation is next to life it self and of many preferr'd before it 3. Common reason Law and experience manifests that the whole or greatest part in all publick or naturall bodies is of greater excellency power and jurisdiction then any one particuler member Thus in all corporations the court of Aldermen and common-councel is of greater power then the Major alone though the chief officer so the whole bench then the Lord chief Justice and the whole Councel then the President And it is Aristotles expresse determination Polit. lib. 1. cap. 2. lib. 3. cap. 8. lib. 4. cap. 8. what forme of government soever it be whatsoever seemes good to the major part of the people that is more excellent and to be preferred before any part or member thereof and that it is unfit the part should be before the whole and he gives for it his reason thus The people know what is profitable necessary
and good for them better then their Kings who are their publick ministers and thus concluding itaque majorum rerum potestas jure populo tribuitur Therefore power of the greater things is by right the peoples 4. This may also appear by the histories and records of all Kingdoms in the world where Tyrants forc't not in by conquest and held not possession afterwards by force In the Romane state both under their Kings and Emperors the chief power in all things of highest concernment was alwayes in the Senate and people and so much Bodin grants That the people hadt he chief Soveraign power of enacting and confirming Lawes the Senates decrees being of no validity unlesse the people ratified them and if any of their Kings Consuls Emperors or Generals did things without their consent as making war concluding peace c. it did not bind but was meerly voyd unlesse the Senate and people together in a great assembly ratified the same by a publick Law But to let passe forreign examples our ancestors in this Kingdome which shewes what power was invested in the whole body of the people have not only constrained our Kings by threats yea force of armes to summon and continue Parliament but likewise compelled them to give their royal assents to Magna Charta Charta de Foresta Confirmatio Chartarum Articuli super Chart as with sundry other publick statutes of right and justice for common good and the subjects safety and to ratify them with their hands seales oathes proclamations against their will and liking which forced assents have been afterward justified and held good in law to bind these kings and their followers to the due observation thereof for where the lawes are convenient necessary or essentiall for the Kingdomes welfare the Subjects just liberty and safety and such as the King by duty and oath is bound to assent to there if they compel the King to give his assent in case of denyal the assent is binding and shall not be voyd by Duresse because the King doth no more then he is obliged by oath law and duty to condiscend unto and the people whose power is above him may justly require 5. And now in answer to Mr. Sedgwick affirming the Crown to be the Kings birth-right a thing which I utterly deny and have clear reasons against it For 1. Howsoever here in England the Crown hath gon often by discent yet never was it granted absolute successive and heretary but arbitrary and elective Hence many of our Kings have come to the crown without any hereditary title by the peoples free election and afterward obeyed as lawful Kings Thus Anno. 975. after Edgars disease not Ethelred the heir to the former King but Edward crowned So Edmund heir to King Ethelred refused and Canutus a stranger elected and crowned So Edmund and Alfred both heirs set a side and Harald and Hardiknute elected and crowned Kings I might also shew how upon the death of King Harald it was enacted by the English Nobility That none of the Danish blood should any more reign after them So after William the first not Robert the elder brother but Rufus the younger brother chosen So after the desease of Richard the first John Earl of Morton was crowned and Arthur the right heir refused The like might be manifested of other nations how their kings did not reign heretarily and by succession from father to sonne but those were chosen Kings amongst them which were held worthy which election was made by the people and revokable by them at any time and whensoever the Crown went now and then by succession it was by usurpation rather than right From humane Histories we might come to the holy Scriptures and shew that the original creation and constitution of the Isralites Kingdoms proceeded only from the authority and power of the people and that solely by Divine permission rather than institution as is apparant by Deut. 11.14 15. And howsoever the Lord did somtimes immediatly nominate the persons of those that should reign over them as Saul David Jehu Jeroboam c. yet the people did constantly confirme and make them Kings and gave them their royal authority none being made Kings by Divine appointment but such as they willingly accepted approved and confirmed to be kings Gods previous designation being but a preparative to their voluntary and free election Moreover It is very cleer that the kings of Judah and Israel were subordinate in power to the people and not only counselled but usually over-rul'd by them in al matters of publick concernment for though they asked a king yet they reserved sufficient authority to themselves to restrain him and to order and dispose of the publick affairs as they thought good But these things we have reserved to a larger treatise 2. Howsoever Bodin contrary to Aristotle Tacitus Lipsius Toloso Machavel Kirchnerus and the greatest Polititions prefers succession before election of Kings and instanceth several nations to be heretary yet this I say quo jure from the beginning it was not so for every heretary Crown is through custom not of right howsoever people have let it passe and admitted them in such a way yet this hath been still in the people a free act and it was in their liberty and power to have chosen any other 3. Whereas some Kings require an oath of their subjects that their heirs and successors shall enjoy the Crown after them and the grounds of taking this oath is upon an opinion that the Crown goes by succession from father to child so that in their understanding they give not any thing away from themselves but only acknowledg what they conceive the person already is Now this oath being given and taken upon a false ground cannot bind in point of conscience because if they knew it was not the others right they would not swear neither meant they in the least to pass away any thing of their own right for they thought it was the others properly before And here by the way observe how vain and groundlesse that common question pro and con is amongst Polititians Statists Civilians and some Divines whether succession or election be the better as if truly and rightly there were some such thing as succession whereas it is neither so nor so I confesse after a Kings desease the people may elect and crown the son and his sons son but that any such thing can be claimed or chalenged as a birth-right it is altogether untrue there is no Kingdom in the world where the crown descends from the father to the son by any true and proper succession the most that can be is not simple succession but a succession limitable and conditional that is a promise on the peoples part for some considerable causes that the son shall be crowned after the fathers death if he be fit to govern and they see it is for their good But that any people should absolutely bind themselves to have the son reign over
without any dispute For {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is Justice of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to part or divide in two Hence {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Judge as it were {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} because he cuts a thing in two equal parts So in the definition Justice is Perpetua constansque voluntas jussuam unicuique tribuens And for distributive justice which according to Logicians is either rewarding or punishing this later Judicatory Justice is qua Paenis debitas aequalitur unicuique distribuit which distributeth due Punishment equally to every one Again If the offender because he is great as a king or prince should therefore be spared it were directly to depart from Justice both in propriety of speech true definition {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is a right judgment not respecting the person to wit for his greatnesse power place wealth c. Thirdly For Reasons I have this to say Wherefore Kings should be punished according to law if not more yet as much as other men 1 Because by their ill example they do more hurt than other men 2. Their sins do more provoke God and draw down Divine wrath upon a nation and therfore there is the greater reason that the Land should be purged of such pollutions 3. The taking of this course would be very much for the publick good and safety for if princes knew they should be punished as other men for their crimes according to law they would be as careful as other men to observe and keep the same Oderunt peccare mali formidine paenae 4. The practise of this would be a very helpfull means to save their souls for whence comes it to pass that they care not what they doe but because whatsoever they doe they know no man will punish them for it 5. If this course were taken there would not be such horrid and execrable wayes used to get Crowns as poysning and murdering of fathers brethren c. but conscience then and a desire to do good would be the chiefest motives leading men therunto 6. In constitution of a Prince whatsoever is confirmed upon a man in respect of office and authority it doth not any way make a change upon his Person neither puts him at any distance touching subjection to the Law more then he was before this relates only to a qualification that is the people judging him to be fit he is invested with a power and right to administer justice but for his personall estate that remaines the same as formerly neither is he by this exempted from Law either directive or coactive more then when a man is made a Judge Justice of peace or the like In this case Civil Magistrates and Church officers are alike what office or function soever a man hath in the Church of God he is still under the power of the Church and for his person the Church-censure can reach him still as it did before For the institution of Pastors Teachers or Elders doth not in the least exempt or priviledge such eclesiasticall officers from the highest censure of the Church more then any other member if there be just cause to proceed against them And there is something to this purpose in the Popish Cannon Law how in case of heresie the Pope ceaseth ipso facto to be Pope looseth his spirituall jurisdiction and authority and deserveth justly to be really deposed Can. si papa 40. Carer Azorius Antonine 3. part shewing that the office of a Pope adds nothing to the person of the man for howsoever he is above the rest for his place yet he is still subject to the Law and under censure yea to be deprived of jurisdiction and Papacie in case he prove an heretick For conclusion then this I positively affirm and will stand to it Where Kings are under Law and receive their Crownes from the people upon protestation and oath to keep the Laws and where the supream Soveraign power of a nation is invested in the Senate and people there Kings for their Tyranny and misgovernment may be convented judged and punished neither are they more exempted from the highest civill punishment then Eclesiasticall officers are from the highest Church-censure their persons are still in the same consideration as other mens persons are and therefore for their transgressions as other men may be judged and punished Now to come to the third particular which is That the people have power not only to convent but to censure depose and punish their Kings for their Tyranny and misgovernment For the confirmation of this I shall desire the Reader to take notise 1. What reasons there are for it 2. What Law 3. What Scripture proof 4. What prefidents and examples both of other nations and Kingdomes as likewise of our own 5. And lastly what the judgment is of learned men touching this thing Reas. 1. It is an undoubted rule of divinity and policie that it is more expedient that one man die though a Prince or King then the whole nation should perish John 11.50 18.14 If the right eye or right hand offend it must be pluckt out and cut off as in the naturall body if a member be so corrupt and putrified that unlesse it be taken away the whole body is in danger to perish in such a case for prevention and health sake every one wil allow the cutting it off so in the politick body when the safety of the whole lies in the removing of one or more unfound and bad members it must be don and it is necessary it should be so for it is a maxime in Philosophy that totum non subjicitur parti sed pars toti so again totum non regitur motu partis sed pars totius to which that is agreeable in the Poet immedicabile vulnus En se recidendum est ne pars sincera trahetur Reas. 2. Kings being the people officers ministers creatures as we said it must needs follow that they are responsable to their masters and makers and being found unfaithfull stewards they have power to displace them of their trust and office If the keeping of a city or castle be committed to a man and he betrayes the same to the enemy or dismantles the wals and fortifications to expose it unto danger is it questionable in such a case whether the State putting him into that trust may not call him to an account and punish him justly for it Reas. 3. When two men contract and covenant together upon certain conditions and termes if one party break the agreement the other is set free and no further bound to him either in point of Law or conscience When Kings break their coronation oaths and promises keep not the conditions and termes upon which they were elected and crowned but become tyrants the bond and knot between subjects and them is essentially broken neither is there any tribute duty custome or alleagance
c. from the people any further due unto them I know no faster bond or knot between any two parties then man and wife the relation between Kings and subjects I am sure is not neerer neverthelesse all grant adulterium etiam vinculum ipsum matrimonii solvit adultery in either person breaks even that very bond and knot of marriage why therefore a subject breaking his covenant with the King in being a traitor should be punished for it and the King breaking his covenant with the people in proving a tyrant or traitor to the people should not be punished likewise I am sure there is no man living able to give a just reason for it Reas. 4. If men by Law may be punished yea and great punishment is inflicted upon them who are onely as instruments used by Princes to accomplish their wicked designes and meerely act to please them surely it is against justice reason and all conscience that the first mover and grand author should escape unpunished Gods example teacheth otherwise who in all ages hath punished the author of sinne more severely and extreamly then the instrument we see many times the adulterous mother punished for her whoredome yet the bastard spared but that the bastard should suffer and the mother escape it is an example unheard of Reas. 5. Howsoever men may remit the wrong or injury as it it in reference to themselves and their own interest neverthelesse as the transgression respecteth Gods Law and so far as God cals for judgment and punishment it is not in their power to spare or pardon though they may doe with their own what they will yet what is the Lords they may not alter mitigate qualifie c. but they ought to proceed according to the directions and rules which he hath prescribed to them I say without addition or dimunition strictly punctually and precisely I shall end this point with the words of Bodin I am of opinion saith he that no Soveraign Prince neither yet any man alive can pardon the punishment due unto the offence which is by the Law of God death no more then he can dispense with the Law of God whereunto he is himself subject And if it be so that the Magistrate deserve capitall punishment which despenseth with the Law of his King how shall it be lawfull for a Soveraign Prince to dispense with his subjects from the Law of God And further if the Prince himself cannot give away the least civil interest of his subjects or pardon the wrong don to another man how can he pardon the wrong don unto ALMIGHTY GOD or murder wilfully committed which by the Law is death for all the pardon he can give vide lib. 1. de Reip. cap. 10. Secondly As for Lawyers law it is just like Mr. William Prin it speaks every thing and any thing and nothing Thus their law and he are like the Dutch mans hose you may wear them how you will put them up or down for they are made to serve both wayes but for that whirligig and busie body I do but mention him by the way for there is an Independant piece comming forth to shew his lightnesse contradiction extreme pride and malice What punishment by law is due unto a Traytor it is so obvious and well known as to cite Statutes for it would be but as a vain repetition Now the Law cleerly resolves 28. Hen. 8. C. 7 That if the King become an open enemy to the kingdom and subjects to wast or ruin them or shall seek to betray them to a forraign nation he becomes a traytor to the realm and hereupon doth forfeit his very title to the Crown Bracton saith the King is the highest Justiticiar in the kingdom Licet in justitia recipienda minimo de regno suo comparitur but as low as any in receiving justice lib. 3. cap. 9. fol. 167. c. This indeed is law for what is law {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} according to the strict Etimologie a proper signification but an equal distributing to every one his own whether it be reward or punishment and therefore whensoever any thing hath been enacted to priviledge kings and princes from personal punishment in case they transgressed against God and men and should prove Tyrants Traytors Murderers Pirates Witches and what not I do avouch it was no law to speak truly and properly it was not {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} but {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as contrary to the law of God and nature as light is to darknesse and these were right Antinomians as opposing and denying law to establish their own wicked and lawlesse decree Law is ratio naturalis natural reason but it is no principle in nature to punish the lesser theft murder treason tyranny c. and spare the greater theeves murderers c. to execute the bastard and quit the mother as we said before Again 'T is without dispute when Princes prove Tyrants their deposition is justificable by law Now to know a Tyrant King James describes him thus A King governing in a setled kingdom ceaseth to he a King and degenerates into a Tyrant so soon as hee leaves to rule by his own laws If this be true as it is most true then it is the highest degree of Tyranny condemned and abhorred by God and all good men when the King begins to invade his subjects persons rights liberties c. to set up an arbitrary power imposeth unlawful taxes raises forces plunders wasteth and spoils his kingdom imprisons kills and banisheth his most faithful best people in an hostile and wrathful manner whom he ought to protect and rule in peace and whether this King have not thus done even our enemies themselves being judges There is one thing remarkable in the aforesaid speech where he saies He ceaseth to be a King Hence I gather that a King degenerating into a Tyrant hath no benefit nor any thing to help himself in point of law by any Statute containing an immunity or exemption of the Kings person from punishment as death it self for whatsoever is provided in such a case it is only in reference to a King but when he ceaseth to be a King he loseth the benefit of all such acts of Parliament neither is there any Statute broken if he personally suffer for his crimes Thirdly For Scripture proof or presidents Zuinglius positively affirms that the Israelites might not only resist but also depose their kings for wickednes idolatrie yea that al the people were justly punished by the Lord because they removed not their wicked Kings out of their places and brings sundry instances for it Explinat Aut. 42. That God did punish the people for their kings enormities t is evident by Jer. 15.1 2 3 4. 2 King 21.11 12. Chap. 23.26 24.3 and the history of the Kings and Chronicles in sundry other places clearly shew so much the which thing surely God in justice would not
collected that justice may not be executed upon some offenders for special and notorious crimes whether subdued in war or taken any other way Fourthly The often caused war to maintain his interest against the publick interest this constantly and unweariedly So the Remonstrance At this Mr. Sedgwick grows angry and fals into passion You lye grosly saith he But wherein These things which you propound were never thought of in the begining of the quarrel The Parliament alwaies professed never to alter the Government to protect the King's Person c. Afterwards we have something said in scorn of their present form of government with his fiction and dream touching the King Ans. 1. Touching the time when some things are to be proposed it is the necessary occasion which must alwaies be considered In civil affairs we see what at one time may be born others afterwards upon just and good ground may abolish and take away or otherwise we should deny men the use of their sense and reason Secondly We know it is no Parliament principle that their votes and agreement should be taken as the Lawes of the Medes and Persians which altereth not their constant practise is to alter and change as they see reason for it and therefore it is the weakest reasoning that can be to argue the Parliament voted so and so therefore it must stand For instance the Prelates with their courts cannons service-book and other dependances are abolished and that by vote of Parliament now put case they should be which God forbid again re-established aske of a Royallist if there might not be enough said to justify the Parliament in this latter act Thirdly For the odium and disgrace which he puts upon their present form of government calling it a headlesse monster a hoddy-doddy an all-breach able to affright solid and serious men to their armes and if he should fight against any thing he should fight against it and pag. 12. brats of their own brain Jn reading this it makes me thinke how Nichomachus in Plutarch very fitly answered an ideot that could see no beauty in the famous Helena painted by Zeuxis take my eyes said Nichomacus and you shall thinke her to be a goddesse J will not here speak how treasonable his words are as moving strongly to rebellion and to raise a new war and to cause commotions again in the land But J see t is true In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin and he that refraineth his lips is wise Fourthly He should have cleared the King of the things laid to his charge as to have been the author and contriver of a most unjust war and is consequently guilty of all the innocent blood rapine spoyl and mischief to the Kingdome as in the Remonstrance pag. 24. adde the losse of Rochel in France by his lending ships to the French King and the Isle of Ree and Cales voyage and the ground and reason of the quarrel How he endevoured to stir up factions and differences between the honest party in England and Scotland that he might take advantage by such division his open declaring in Parliament that he owes no account of his actions to none but to God alone What hath beene reported about his Fathers death and Marquis Hambleton his designe in bringing up the Northern Army and his large offers to the Scots Army to be brought up to London to awe the Parliament his usuall breaking of his promises protestations oathes as in many particulars might be named his sending over the Jewels of the crown to be pawned by the Queen for powder and ammunition to fight against the Parliament and the Priviledges rights and liberties of the subject How he made 1500 widdows in one morning as Mr. Henderson told him And concerning Ireland how clear it is by many severall passages and by the examination of Mar-carte and Macquire c. that the pretence of men for the King of Spaines service a year or two before the rebellion in Jreland was but a colour to keep some in armes for a foundation of that rebellion how the Jrish rebels call themselves the kings and Queens Army the first clause in the oath injoyned by the supream catholick councell at Kelkenny in Jreland was to maintain his royall prerogative against the puritants in the Parliament of England Jn one of his letters taken at Nazeby he commanded the Earle of Ormond to give particular thanks to Mustarre and Planket the two Arch-rebels in Jreland so divers of the Jrish rebels had private passes from the King for the heading of the rebels there J Iet passe loans shipmony monopolies Knighthood inlarging of forrests inclosing of commons ingrossing of gunpowder his unparrell uxoriousnesse and affections to the Queen and compliance with the Pope c. Now all these things Mr. Sedgwick should first have answered before he should have affirmed Jf there be any reason for a Prince to take up armes against his subject he hath and why so because there attempt is to destroy the King and overthrow the very foundations of Government and a little before the life of the King and his posterity is aymed at Answ The premises granted to put him by is a thing lawful and necessary of which more hereafter And this may be done without destroying the very foundations of government unlesse by foundations he means some particular form or kind of government but that is not proper to say for the foundations of government is indeed that absolute entire and independant power residing alwayes in the people and this foundation cannot be destroyed J meane the right and habit of it though the use and exercise may be wrung'd from them so that to change and alter in respect of the forme or kinde of governments by vertue of the said power it is in the peoples liberty whensoever they see just cause and reason for it Fiftly For the rest which is first reproaching the Army as to be their designe only to attain their end malice ambition and revenge And secondly That the King shall put all into Gods hand and shall receive it again in the life and glory of God This is capable of no other answer but reproof and pitty To follow Mr. Sedgwick in his own order next he comes to answer pag 26.27 c. which is the second part of the question and a second reason against accommodation The safety of an agreement here he takes some words out of the Remonstrance That the King hath forfeited all his power into your hands that the people are free to make the best advantages and pag. 27. having him and his party captivated and in their power Reader I professe unto thee in the word of truth here I have read over some leaves and have done my best to see what is in his answer but for severall pages together as 23 24 25 26 c. I finde nothing therein for I esteeme not his calumniations rash-judging self-prayse as any thing and for this be