Ostracisms in Greece and even Cartes himself was used like a Skellum in Holland but those were Legal Banishments and according to the Custom of the Country whereas that Earl's Usage was never known to any Civilized part of the World For having his Papers plundered to find Matter against him which my Lord Anglesey though he was one of the Committee of Council appointed to overlook those Papers acknowledged to Mr. Charleton and me was a very illegal Practice and abominable foul Play even while he himself was employed about it amongst his Papers they found a naked Draught of an Association which as I said before was a thing so much above-board that it was Ordered by the House of Lords themselves This Paper which signified nothing when it was accumulated with their Irish Evidence at the Old Baily was not to be lost but was afterwards set up by it self for a Countrey Quintin to be thrown at by all the Loyal Sparks of the Nation where they were to get Garlands for knocking it down For those were the Men whom the King delighted to Honour and it was an assured Knighthood to the Foreman of an Abhorrence if not to several of his Fellows And if the Knights of England were to be surveyed I believe the Knights of the Address and of the Abhoâ—rence of Associations would be found to be the largest Order but I dare say would have been the thinnest if they were to have been Created Bannerets But the rotten part of the Law belonging to the Middle-Temple who were in haste for Preferment the Saunderses and the Shoreses and I care not who were forward to pleasure the Court in this Matter and began the Yelp from an Inns of Court which was thought Authentick in the Countrey and so all the Curs in England from the Foreland of Kent to St. Michael's Mount set up a full-mouth'd Cry against that Earl I refer my self to the Infamous Gazetts of the Year 82. Which were remarkable upon this account that they were often a whole Sheeâ— being swoln with Abhorrences Now I desire any Noble Earl in England to lay his Hand upon his Heart and consider whether he would be content to be so serv'd and to be baited twice a Week with Abhorrers in Sir Lionel Ienkins's Bear-Garden for the best part of a Twelvemonth together and at last be forced with downright worrying to steal out of England and go and die in a Ditch After this no Man could call his Countrey his own for the Character of my Lord Shaftsbury which they had endeavoured to render hateful with the same ease might have been stuck upon another for the Kingdom of Poland being Elective it lay in the Breast of the Court to choose whom they pleased King of Poland If when my Lord Shaftsbury was forced to leave his own House and had secreted himself at Mr. Watson's he talk'd with Howard of Escreck about relieving himself and his Countrey he did amiss and it was a defect for talk is but talk when all 's done Now my Lord Russel was an Eye-witness to this long Scene of Invasion of Rights and his Foresight was much earlier witness a Letter of his of an old Date which I shed Tears upon at Woburn at some distance of time after his Death but I find that no length of time will dry them up I have spoiled the entireness of that Scene of Tyranny which my Lord lived to see by frequent Digressions but it signifies nothing because the Bishops that mooted the Case with his Lordship supposed the Religion and Rights of the Nation to be Actually Invaded which Case his Lordship wisely shortened by saying that our Religion being established by Law was a Civil Right and so the Question reduced is in short Whether the Rights of the Nation being Actually Invaded may be Defended And here I join Issue with those two Bishops and so I would with a Bench of them upon these two Points which I will maintain First That the Rights of the Nation being Invaded may be Defended Secondly That no body has a Right to Defend them but they whose Rights they are First That the Rights of the Nation being Invaded may be Defended for otherwise they are No Rights They may be the Effects of special Grace and Favour Bounties Courtesies Court-Smiles Places at Whithall during Pleasure the Breath of the Court which may be suckt in again ill-advised Gifts which may be recalled by Acts of Resumption or any thing but Rights If I cannot defend that which is mine from him that would take it away then it was not mine from the first As Mr. Selden used to say he that had but Two pence was King of Two pence and might defend his own against a King of Ten-pence What signifies the King's having more Rights than I if they be all upon the same Bottom for if he Invades my Two-pence at the same time he destroys his own Ten-pence because he breaks down that Hedge of the Law which secures all Mens Rights and then I am sure all lies in Common Words do but darken so clear a Point for if any thing be mine it is mine to Have and to Hold. Secondly That no body has a Right to defend these Rights but they whose Rights they are This necessarily follows from the Former for Rights must be a Man 's to Have before they can be his to Hold. Besides what has any body else to do with other Mens Rights It must needs be that the Rights of a Nation are to be Defended for Kings and Queens and all the Retinue of Government were ordained by the Nation for that very End and if they turn upon us and Invade our Rights as Chancellor Fortescue saysâ— We are Defrauded and over-reached in our first Intention for then our King shall Injure us which before we had Kings it was Lawful for No Man to do That 's a hard Case for a King of England had always Revenue enough to keep him Honest and had no need to take indirect ways to Enslave his People that is to say to put an end to a Government which it was so much worth his while to keep And there can no Tolerable Account be given of the Attempts made in the three last Reigns upon our Liberties but only Bigottry They had a mind to Convert their Kingdoms and knowing that most Mens Souls follow their Bodies they took it for Granted that if they established an absolute Empire over the one they should have a full Command of the other And so after a world of Arbitrary Proceedings the Common-Prayer-Book was sent down into Scotland where the King had no more Right to send it than into the Mogull's Countrey but it was under a Pretence of Uniformity when there was nothing less meant for it varied from ours and was nearer the Original Mass-book out of which it was taken No the Design was to enter them of the King's Religion and then they might have had a New Edition of their
Parliament without which he had no more Right to them than the Prince of Wales now has In the mean time the Pulpits were the Ensurers of the King's Word and said it was like the Laws of the Mâ—des and Persians which Altered not And as for the Customs they Preached that he had a Natural Right to them for they had gotten the true Art of spelling all the Oppressions and Devildoms in the World out of the pregnant word King though it is impossible to fetch any more Power out of that word than just what the People of England have put into it What I write is in the Memory of Man It is true in Sweden the word King now of late signifies infinite Power in Denmark since the Force put upon the Senate it is Proclamation-Law in King Ioseph's Kingdom of Hungary it is doing of Justice in general or according to his young Discretion in France it is Will and Pleasure because it is and it is the Mouth-watering General Excise Standing Armies Levying Money All things This makes him a Powerful and a Formidable Enemy but it would be more formidable to have those Outlandish things come hither though it were to make another as Powerful Monarch here as the late Licensed Book of the State of England would fain have it I take it to be a Licensed Book because it was Published in the Gazetâ—e But I tell that Author it is impossible to have here in England such a brave thing as the French King is till we be first made such sorry things as the French Subjects are I have not forgot where I digressed and I say that by Experience Popish Tyranny is so far better than Protestant that Pâ—ople are more aware of it and sooner rid their hands of it We saw this so plainly in Powis-house that nothing more can be writ upon the Subject A Massâ—house devoted to Destruction was saved by the Inscription of my Lord Delamere's Name that it was provided for his Lodging But a Protestant Inscription will never save a Mass-house a second time I might descant upon his Calling in Providence to decide a Title which is to employ the Majesty of Heaven in Undersheriffry and the Woes he lays upon Non-swearers and their Fighting against God if they happen to be in the Wrong as I will swear they are But I will keep my Word because as I said he seems to recal his first Paragraph in his Second which begins in these following words But all this may look like a Pathetical aggravating the Matter unless it should appear to be well supported I go therefore in the next place to set before you those Reasons that seem convincing to me even though there were no more to be said for the present Settlement but that we have a Throne filled and a King and Queen in Possession From henceâ—orth therefore Rhetorick apart we must expect nothing but Reasons and convincing Reasons I shall take the pains of examining them one by one and find out if I can their Power of Conviction which I am afraid is like an Estate left in Diego's Will The First Reason which seems Convincing to him and sufficient for the Purpose is that we have a Throne filled and a King and Queen in Possession A Throne filled I think it is for it never yet held more than one Person at a time unless it were widened once in a Thousand Years by the Consent of the People I believe that a King and Queen in Possession at once or a King and Queen de Facto Together in Opposition to de Iure which the Scotch Parliament justly called a Villanous Distinction would have frighted even Coke himself the first Author that I know of that affected Distinction and much more would have frighted old Littleton out of whose Mouth there never came any thing else but Ung Dieu Ung Roy. We know a King alone comes from Heaven or a Queen alone comes from Heaven and either of them Fills a Iure-Divino Throne But to talk of Two in Possession together without first naming the true Cause of it which was the Good-will of the People who were perfectly free to have had either or neither or both is to talk of an utter Impossibility For here all their Schemes fail them all their Texts fail them and they cannot shew any such Pattern in the Mount Besides Possession even of a single Person is the worst Title in the World it is the Claim of a Disseysor an Intruder an Usurper and of Oliver who told the Fifth-Monarchy Man that he only kept Possession of the Throne till King Iesus came and then he was ready to Resign it to him The Pastoral seems to be aware of this and therefore immediately these words follow in the same Paragraph The bringing the State of the Question so low may seem at first view not to be of so much Advantage to Their Majesties Title but since I intend to carry the Matter further before I leave it I hope it may be no incongruous Method to begin at that which will take in the greatest Numbers since there is no Dispute in this that they are actually in Possession of the Throne that they protect us and that we by living under their Protection and enjoying the Benefit of it are therefore bound to make some Returns to them for it In my Life I never met with such a short-winded Author for he is perpetually sucking in his Breath and what he advances in the beginning of a Paragraph is presently recalled A Throne filled and a King and Queen in Possession was in his very last Period a Convincing Argument for this Settlement yea though nothing more were to be said for it whereby it was made such a self-sufficient Convincing Argument as rendred all others superfluous and needless And yet now in this Period he Blemishes his own convincing and self-sufficient Argument as if it might lower and disparage their Majesties Title and plainly confesses it to be purely Drag-net as that which will take in the greatest Numbers One Convincing Argument is as much as one Thousand and as the King has but one Plain Title which is the Gift of the People so there is but one plain Proof of it which is the Instrument of Conveyance of the Crown by both Houses which the King accepting of Confirmed the Thing For that is very true the King might have chose whether he would be King or no he could not be made so against his Will nor can any Man be forced to take a Trust. But after all this had passed in the Face of the Sun and been transacted by the Greatest Authority upon Earth I mean the English Community which as King Charles the First says Moulded this Government and made it what it is and consequently both at first erected the Office of a King and always disposed of the Crown as they found Cause and never did it upon more valuable Considerations than in their last just Choice I say
it is no more than Common Honesty to stand to one's own Act and Deed But in the way of the Passive Doctrine to prostitute the Lives Liberties and Estates of the People of England to the Will of the Prince is Treason against the Realm and Higher Treason than the Highâ—Treason against the Prince For as Fortesâ—ue and the rest of the Lawyers â—ay the King was made for the Kingdom and not the Kingdom for the King And as Treason against the Realm is such as the King cannot pardon so it is such as an Actual King by Succession is capable of being guilty of as appears by several Acts of Parliament which I can shew to any Dabbler in our Government that understands it not He clenches his third Paragraph with a Fourth which follows in these words This is either true or all these who live upon a Continent and that are subject to the Conquests and Invasions of their Neighbours must be misâ—rable For though our Happy Scituation has exempted us for a whole Age from falling under any such Difficulties yet this is a Case that falls often out in all different States which are on the same Continent for if Subjects owe their natural Prince such an Obstinate Allegiance that neither Desertion nor Conqueâ—t can dissolve it then in what a miserable Condition must they be when they fall under the Power of their Enemy that never thinks himself secure of them but treats them still as Enemies till they swear Allegiance to him Now all the true Maxims of Government being such that they must tend to the Preservation and not to the Ruin of Mankind it is certain that all those are false which tend to the inevitable Destruction of Cities and Societies and therefore this of an indiffeasable Allegiance must be reckoned among these since the fatal Consequences that must attend upon it are evident and this is the Opinion in which all who have considered this matter either as Lawyers or Casuists do agree This is shifting the Scene for he knows that we are a World by our selves and have nothing to do with the Continent It is a Londlopeing Argument and till we are in the Condition of the Flanderkin Towns he need not urge us with their Practice and Example And he is wholly out of the way in every word he utters For we are not Deserted or Forsaken nor Conquered or Subdued nor under the Power of an Enemy nor treated as Enemies and cudgelled into an Oath of Allegiance nor ever will be If I were hired to write against the Oath of Allegiance I would use such Arguments as this is Are we in the Case of those that are Slaves under the Spaniard and Slaves under the French that often change their Master but never their Condition that are Prize and Retaken and Prize still Let him answer me to that If not why must our Vertue be taught us by their Necessity God help thâ—m my Soul pities their Case and I should not readily know what to do in it because I never considered it And perhaps it is like one of those wherein our Saviour forbids Forecast and would have no Man Premeditate but promises help at a dead Lift Dabitur in illâ Horâ But in all his Travels could he find no Copy for us to write after nor no Body to match us with but a Conquered People What then is become of our Thanksgiving Deliverance which God and Man have been told of If after all we are to be in the Condition of a Conquered People it is a Deliverance downstairs and our last State is worse than the First For we were not Conquered in King Iames's Time though we were in election to be so and though his Westminster-hall Red-coats had made a fair Progress in it And therefore I am sure neither King nor Parliament have reason to thank him for the Choice of this Argument When all is done as I said beâ—ore all Arguments that come from abroad are Foreign to Us. We live under Municipal Laws and Local Statutes and By-Laws that are Peculiar to this Empire And therefore if he had offered us the tenth part of an Argument fetch'd out of the Bowels of our own Laws we would have hearkn'd to him but as for his Stories from abroad he may even if he pleases carry them home again But I love to talk with his Maxims as I do the sight of an Ass who looks like Wisdom and Gravity and is not For Allegiance Defined by Convenience is much like Religion Defined by maintaining a Coach and Six However let us have his own words over again For if Subjects owe their Natural Prince such an Obstinate Allegiance that neither Desertion nor Conquest can dissolve it then in what a miserable Condition must they be when they fall under the Power of their Enemy that never thinks himself secure of them but treats them still as Enemies till they swear Allegiance to him Now I can tell him that Allegiance is so Obstinate a thing that neither Desertion nor Conquest nor any thing in the World but what is intrinsecal to it that is Breach of Covenant or Consent of both Parties can Dissolve it It is a Moral Duty and Heaven and Earth may pass away before Allegiance can pass away As for Desertion we must first know what it is before we can know whether it will affect our Allegiance A Souldier's Deserting and running away from his Colours we know but what is this Deserting a Crown or a Kingdom A Resignation Renunciation Cession accepted by the People is valid and they are words currant in our Law and the Prince being thereby Deposed Allegiance ceases But as for Desertion we must enquire further about it Did the King Desert Willingly or Unwillingly Did not his People Desert him first If so then for shame never say that King Iames Deserted but say that he was Deserted Well now we are coming to the Merits of the Cause Had the People Reason to forsake King Iames or no had he Forfeited had he broke his Allegiance first was He the Aggressor Yes He had made our Allegiance to him Impossible For we were by the Constitution Sworn Brethren Conjurati Fratres ad Defensionem Regis Regni and he had brought things to that pass that we must either part with our King or our Realm The keeping our Allegiance to King Iames's Person would have Perjured us for we owed a Higher Duty to our Country and Laws to which he was sworn as well as we But instead of the double Duty which lay upon him of observare observari facere of Keeping the Laws and Causing them to be kept he abridged our Common Law and Statutes into five Positions of a Dispensing Power After which I would never look upon a Statute-Book more but kept the Copy of that Compendious Law always in my Pocket to see whether it would outlast the Paper which fell in pieces at the Prince's coming Now an Allegiance to the Destruction
of our Laws is no Allegiance it makes our Circumcision to become Uncircumcision What is Impracticable is Void as those great Souls saw of whom the World was not Worthy who would have set aside the Duke of York in time and not have suffered him to play his Rex which they knew was a Contradiction to this Government A Traytor King a Protecting Destroyer and a Wolf Shepherd they knew were things not of a Piece and Irreconcileable And therefore all Honest Men were for being rid of King Iames long before and they were in the Right It was not such a puiny thing as the after-clap of a Prince of Wales which made them part with him For though the laboured Discovery of that Fraud would have done great Service to this Government and ought not to have been spoiled by being put into a strong Box and let out again to disadvantage yet we must have more than a Supposititious Child to Justify this Revolution For you must stop there you may indeed set aside the Changeling but that does not extend to Out the Father who was Tenant for Life because perhaps his Wife went fourty Weeks with a Cushion In short knowing that King Iames was a Contradiction to the Government and had rendred our Allegiance Impossible we parted with him upon Reasons that were Primitive and Coaeval with the Government but as for those that do not allow that he Forfeited and yet would not Assist him against an Invasion as he Proclaimed it and as for his Mercenaries that Revolted from him and pick'd his Pocket what Reasons they had I know not If he Deserted he was forced to Desert for the very Ground he stood upon fell from under him as I told more than Fourty People it would be so before ever the Prince of Orange embarqued and because I loved my Country was mightily pleased that it would be a brave Dry Dutch War without any Bloodshed And therefore as for those that forced away Iames the Just when according to them he had made no Forfeiture either by their Resistance of him or by their Non-assistance They must never plead his Desertion in discharge of their Allegiance for that is to make their Crime their Plea and to take Advantage of their own Fault which neither Law nor Reason will ever admit So much for Desertion now for Conquest which is become a very Great modern Point And here we meet with new and unheard-of Conquests of a King Conquered and not one of his Subjects For so all the Conquering Bishops now pull in their Horns and say that they meant that King Iames alone was Conquered and not the Nation That is a cleaverer Tip in my Opinion than taking out the Middle Pin and throwing down none of the rest But let us see now what Earnings they will make of their Ten-pin tip their Solitary Captive King Iames. If the Prince of Orange did Conquer King Iames in a Just War why then he was his Prisoner of War and he might sell Him and his wearing Clothes Or because as another Bishop says The Rights of War are the same here as they are abroad he might have put him to Fine and Ransom as the French King did the Duke of Wirtemberg or as Teckely did General Heusâ—er But what does this Intitle him to further Not a Farthing of the Revenue for that is Publick Money not a Jewel of the Crown for that is the Goods of the Kingdom much less to a Dram of Allegiance for that is wholly a new Score And yet this Conquest is continually alledged both in and out of the Pulpit as a Motive for Swearing as if it were the chief Ingredient in our Allegiance to this Government There is nothing at all gained by Conquering King Iames's Person for he did not carry the Government of England about him If he had been willing and so disposed he could not have Resigned the Government to the Prince of Orange for the Parliament in Edward the First 's time declared King Iohn's Resignation of this Kingdom to the Pope to be Absolutely Void because it was done sans leur Assent the Parliament's Consent was not had to it And on the other hand the ruining and spoiling an Old King does not make a New one For that is but a Tartar's Conceit that if he destroy a Wise or Handsom Man he shall forthwith inherit his Wisdom or Beauty But how came King Iames to be so abandoned as to be singled out and Conquered by himself We that knew he ceased to be a King or perhaps of Right never was one can give a fair Account of this Matter But where were his Lieges all this while that held him for their Natural Lord and by Divine Right and yet failed him They that thought their Allegiance intire and not Dissolved by King Iames himself ought by Law to have Defended him Conâ—ra omnes homines Vivos Mortuos against all Men both Alive and Dead So that if old Schomberg should chance to walk for ought I know by Virtue of their Allegiance they are bound to fight his Ghost This is a Consideration which belongs to the Conquering Bishops and their Inferiour Clergy and I leave it amongst them So much for this new-fashioned Partial Conquest of a King Conquered and his People Untouch'd But I have known by long Experience that to serve a present Turn these Men have an excellent Faculty at newly devised Fables I believe it was never heard of from the beginning of the World that any one who was owned to be their Rightful King was ever Conquered and his People not but instead of that They look'd on Such a Kingdom belongs to some other World and not to this for in this World as our Saviour said their Subjects and Servants would Fight for them This is the new Separate Interest as if a King were not so much as Knight of the Shire or as if the County were no way Concerned in their Representative As I said before I set aside this Partial Conquest and come to that which is a True Conquest and will examine whether that Dissolves Allegiance Suppose a King and his People who are all of a Piece till either of them break Faith with the other are both run down and fall under the Chance of War It is no matter which of them is in the Conqueror's hands because they are all as one If their King have that hard Fate they must either Rescue or Ransome him though their private Money and their Church-Plate go for it And if any of his People fall into the Enemies hands He must do the same by them If neither of them can do this but they are overpowred and unable the next thing is to Advise the Party that is in the Briars to make the best Terms they can Redime te Captum quam queas minimo This is a Duty on both sides and where this Advice cannot be express'd it is always implied and justly presumed But how then does
that it should be Treason for any Man to deny it What Offence it were to contravene this Act Sir Thomas More answered that he should offend if he said No because he was Bound by the Act but that this was Casus levis Whereupon Sir Thomas More said he would propose a higher Case suppose by Parliament it were enacted quod Deus non sit Deus and that it were Treason to contravene whether it were an Offence to say according to the said Act Richard Rich replied yea but said withal I will propose a middle Case because yours is too high The King you know is constitute Supream Head of the Church on Earth why should not you Master More accept him so as you would me if I were made King by the Supposition aforesaid Sir Thomas More Answer'd the Case was not the same because said he a Parliament can make a King and Depose him and that every Parliament-man may give his Consent thereunto but that a Subject cannot be bound so in the Case of Supremacy Quia Consensum ab eo ad Parlamentum praebere non potest Et quanquam Rex sic acceptus sit in Anglia plurimae tamen partes exterae idem non affirmant Because the Parliament-man cannot carry the Subject's Consent to Parliament in this Case that is to say no body but Christ could make his own Vicar and the Head in Heaven make the Head on Earth and although the King be held to be Head of the Church here in England yet the greatest part of the World abroad are of another mind Here Sir Thomas More stuck for I believe stick He did because he laid down his Life for it but you see that the undoubted unquestioned Law of the Land was this That a Parliament can make and Depose a King for it is the Foundation of their Arguing And it cannot be thought that a Learned Lord Chancellor and Sollicitor General should be both Ignorant in the First Principles of the Law Neither would Richard Rich have been made a Lord and the Head of a Noble Family of Earls if it had not been Current Law in those Days for such a Principle upon Record would have been as bad and hurt his Preferment as much as if he had been Stigmatized And therefore my Lord of Essex's Argument was more than Measure That if a Parliament could make and Depose a King and make Richard Rich King much more they might foreclose the Duke of York who was no King and more unqualified than Richard Rich and might make the Prince of Orange King an otherghess Man than Richard Rich. Thus that Great Man Argued but Care was taken that he should Argue for the Good of his Countrey no more and therefore we that are left behind partly to bewail the loss of such Great Men and partly to imitate them ought to uphold their Cause and as mean a Man as I am able to maintain these plain Truths against all the World Though indeed my Lord of Essex told me that his Adversaries in that Debate waved the Jargon of Divine Right and the Line of Succesâ—ion which had been inculcated in the Second Volume of the History of the Reformation and by the Heroe himself to whom it was Dedicated and at that time they betook themselves chiefly to Reasons of State They were got at the old Scarecrow Venient Romani the Foreign Catholick Princes would espouse the Duke of York's Quarrel the Ancient Kingdom of Scotland would admit him for Their King in opposition to our Act of Parliament and this would entail a Dangerous War upon the Nation That is I suppose the Navy Royal of Scotland would have given Law to the English Fleet They were likewise doubtful of Ireland and if these two Kingdoms were dismembred from us the solitary Kingdom of England would not make that Figure in the World as it used to do And therefore according to the Method of all hired Politicks they must make sure of sinking Three Kingdoms for fear of losing Two and Deliver up the Castle for fear the Suburbs should Revolt With such fitting Arguments was that Cause supported and if I have broke any Rules in repeating that Great Man's private Discourse now it is done I cannot help it But I say let his Integrity be known and speak as Loud as his Blood cries And I am sure they that would stifle that Man's Honour would stifle his Death But the Bill of Exclusion is of no Concernment at this Time though if we had then ventured our Lives for it we had done well and it had been good Husbandry for it had saved more than an Hundred Thousand Lives since which are all of a price and as dear to them as owned them as ours are to us I grant a True Statesman is of another Opinion and values being called his Grace or Noble Marquess more than a Million of Lives provided that in such a general Destruction he can but save one And to confirm themselves in their ill-gotten Honours they generally hatch Plots suborn Rebellions or any thing that they think may create Business keep themselves from being Questioned and thin Mankind whereby they lose so many of their Enemies which by their Oppression they have heaped up to themselves So I have been told a certain Person being asked why he Destroyed my Lord Russell said it was Self-preservation he did it in his own Defence because my Lord Russell would have Destroyed him A fit Answer for the Answerer because it is just the Excuse of a Highway-man who adds Murder to his Robbery and Wrong because otherwise the True-man might have pursued him and Hanged him for it But the Masterpiece of their Policy they have stoln from the Old Popes of Rome to send their Princes into the Holy Wars while they domineer'd and plaid their own Game at home I express'd my Fears as soon as he was Crown'd that our King would be so serv'd and that taking advantage of his Matchless Courage they would put him upon hazardous Expeditions for such Counsels are on Nature's Side and are soon hearkned to by a Cordelyon or an Edward the First who were all on fire for Crusadoes And it was easy to tell what Advices the Statesmen would give such to be sure as agreed with His Inclinations but were much more for their own Interest for if a Man but look into the Tyring-room and see the old Actors he knows what the Play will be without a Bill It is the Observation of the Learned Antiquary Selden that our Nation got nothing by those fruitless Voyages into the Holy Land after a vast Expence of Blood and Treasure but only the Sign of the Saracen's Head For after our People came home again worsted and with great loss they had no other way to save their Credit but to represent the Saracens as Giants and to picture them with Eyes like Saucers and a Mouth big enough to eat a Man And it is well if the English bring home any
more out of Flanders than some such ill-favoured Story of what a strong way of Encamping the French have Butâ— what Business had we there The Sea is our Element where our Shipping was lately more Numerous than any Nations in the World and better built being of English Oak and our Seamen Heart of Oak Such a Strength well managed and well applied is fit to give Laws to all the World And till now from King Edgar's Time who had a Fleet of three Thousand Ships to justify his Claim we have always pretended to be Masters of the Sea and should have scorn'd Dutch Help to fight the French Fleet and to go to War upon Crutches for how can Impotent Men stir if their Crutches at any time be out of the way and be not ready Or how if the Dutch and we should ever fall out or the French and they be Friends where are we then And therefore we are No Nation till we can stand upon our own Legs but we live precariously and had need to have very kind-hearted Neighbours about us To know where our Strength lies is a first Principle of Nature and the dullest Creatures are not without it I never saw an Ass offer to butt with his Ears though they are as long as Horns but I have seen him strike with his sullen Hoof because the Instinct of Nature led him to use that part which would do most Execution And therefore it could not be out of Ignorance but for sinister Ends that our Naval Force has been so Neglected which is our known Strength and that the Treasure of the Nation has been diverted into Foreign Channels For many Millions spent upon the Fleet would not be two Pence loss to the Nation but is as cheap as a Man's playing at Cards with his Wife and Children where none of the Winnings go out of the House It is true that heretofore this Nation alone has been an Overmatch for all France by Land as well as by Sea and our Kings have cleared up their Title to that Kingdom in the Heart of it but those Days are done for we were then a Land of Souldiers and there was not a Man in the Kingdom who was not expert and knew how to handle his Arms from Sixteen But the Artillery of the World being changed since that Time we shall never be a warlike Nation more till all our excellent Laws about Bows and Arrows which are wholly disused shall be applied to the use of Fire-Arms For though such a raw thing as our present Militia which will then be another thing does well enough to keep House yet it must be a well-trained if not a Veteran Army that shall do any great Matters abroad What then shall we have a Mercenary Army to supply this Defect and lose Old England to win France I hope not but so it would be for a standing Army plainly destroys this Government There are no Quarters nor is there room in England for an Army If they be Quartered in Houses it is a forcible Entry and Disseysin of a Man's Freehold if they Encamp at Hounslow-heath it is a Rout Riot and Unlawful Assembly A fourth part of the Petition of Right which only asserts our Fundamental Rights is spent against Billetting of Souldiers There was indeed a Confederacy in the late Tyranny betwixt the Court and the Justices of Peace to put this Difficulty upon Publick Houses either to receive Souldiers or to lose their Licences though Licences ought not to be taken away except for a Forfeiture which refusing of Souldiers is not but a Right But such Frauds and Abusions of the Law never wrought any thing else but Abdication Knute than whom there never lookt any thing liker a Conqueror and put an end to Disputed Titles in the Severn at the desire of the English Barons sent his Army back to Denmark for which see Bracton's Englescheria the finest Point of Law in our English Constitution almost in the same words and exactly to the same sense as King William the First 's Laws Bracton Lib. 3. De Corona Cap. 15. Fol. 134. b. Sect. 3. Causa vero Inventionis murdrorum talis fuit quod in diebus Canuti regis Danorum qui post Angliam acquisitam pacificatam rogatu baronum Anglorum remisit ad Daciam exercitum suum ipsi barones Angliae erga ipsum regem Canutum fidejussores extiterunt q. quotquot rex in Anglia secum retineret firmam pacem per omnia haberent ita q. si quis Anglorum aliquem hominum quos rex secum adduxit interficeret si se super hoc defendere non posset Juditio Dei s. aqua vel ferro fieret de eo Justitia si autem aufugeret capi non posset soluerentur pro eo 66. marcae colligebantur in villa ubi quis esset interfectus ideo quia interfectorem non habuerunt si in tali villa pro paupertate colligi non possent colligerentur in hundredo in thesauro regis deponendae Sect. 4. Et dicitur murdrum extraneorum occisio notorum quia sive notus sit vel extraneus ille qui interfectus est semper reputabitur Francigena nisi Englescheria rite fuerit coram justitiariis praesentata per hoc quod sciri possit quod Anglicus extiterit Et qualiter Englescheria praesentari debeat infra plenius dicetur suo loco Knyghton pag. 2358. Lin. 40. Williel 1. Leges Item Murdra quidem inventa fuerunt in Diebus Cnuti regis Dani qui post Adquisitam Angliam pacificam rogatu baronum Anglorum remisit ad Daciam exercitum suum Ipsi vero barones erga regem suum existerent fidejussores quatinus quotquot in terra secum retinerent firmam pacem haberent per omnia verumptamen si quis Anglorum aliquem illorum interfecerit si se super hoc defendere non posset in Deo scilicet aqua vel ferro fieret de eo Justitia sin autem fugeret solveretur ut supradictum est I do not love Digressions because they interrupt all discourse but I could not well avoid this because the mentioning the Bill of Exclusion led me into it though my Business was not so much the Bill of Exclusion as what befel upon the Rejection of that Bill being another Instance of the Oppressions and Invasions of those Times I appeal to every Noble Lord now living who has sworn to this Government whether an Exclusion then had not been better than an Exclusion now and whether they had not better have done that to an Heir Presumptive which they have been since forced to do to an Actual King For they were even then known to be both the self-same Man After the Bill was Rejected with as large a Scrowl of Protestors as perhaps was ever seen in the Lords Journal it came to Equivalents and Expedients for the Security of the Nation And amongst many other things which were Ordered by the House of Lords to annul the Power of a
Common-Prayer-Book the next Year and then the Reason of Uniformity holding alike in both Kingdoms ours ought to be like theirs But the old Herb-woman at Edinburgh put an end to that Game for hearing the Arch-Bishop who watch'd the Rubrick directing him that read the Book to read the Collect for the Day she made a Gross mistake and cried The Diewl Collick in the Wemb of thee and withal threw her Cricket-stool at his Head which gave a Beginning to the War of Scotland for when the Statesmen have reduced a Kingdom to Tinder the least Spark will kindle it The Best Friends that King had and who spilt their Blood for him cannot deny but he had set his Heart upon a Laudean Religion and an English Patriarchate which we all know would have ended in Latin and have been still Ecclesia Anglicana as it was in all Ages I must needs be very Impartial in relating these things for I was a great Neutral in those Days I cannot say I was so in the following Times for I saw the Church-game played here and heard of the Counterpart which was at the Pyrâ—naean Treaty and in the Polish Memorial and I have viewed the very Mass-house where the Last opened Shop and wanted Customers Now we ought to be somewhat the wiser for our Dear bought Experience and never to suffer a Prince Popishly inclined to be admitted to the Government more for they have a standing Pretence of Religion and Conscience to Enslave the Nation and to do it for our own Good to save our Souls and so all our Temporals shall go to wreck in ordine ad Spiritualia whereas whenever a Prince is known to be of our own Religion or of a Travelling Religion which will comply with our's then he has no Church-Pretence of spoiling the Government he cannot be Arbitrary if he would because he has no Excuse left he must Tyrannize for Tyranny's sake and that being open will never go far nor last long Nor will any wise Protestant Prince venture upon such a Hazardous thing for if he should miscarry in it he will not have so much as a Bull from Rome to Bless himself withall And if any future Prince should arise who should think that to be Prerogative which those former Kings practised and thereupon form a Resolution that the Crown of England shall not be the worse for his wearing I shall humbly offer him my Advice before hand not to think of Their Crown for it was no wearing Crown it was so stufft with Prerogative that it was top-heavy and it visibly hurt two of the Heads that wore it I know not nor I care not who eased the Middlemost of that Burden But our Present King came on purpose as appears by his Two Declarations to discharge the Crown of all Arbitrariness and to reduce it to the Standard So that if our Parliaments do not pursue the Ends of those Declarations which are Annexed to the Crown and are the Foundation of this Government they betray the Nation and are Worse to us than the Pensioner Parliament was 2 dly The second Thing which I propounded was to Consider the Point of Defending our Rights wiâ—h Reference to this Revoâ—ution In which I shall carefully Distinguish betwixt the English Right of Self-Defence and the welcome Assistance of the Prince of Orange which came like a Hand out of the Clouds to Help us First I say That if the People of England have not a Right to Defend their Liberties and Properties against Tyranny they have neither Liberties nor Properties 2 dly When this Nation falls under Tyranny they must be Delivered either by Miracle or Means Not by Miracle as a Great Man very Truly said and therefore we must use the Means 3 dly If we have not a Power within our selves to Preserve our selves then as Mr. Manwood said in Queen Elizabeth's Time in Parliament The Realm is no Realm but we depend upon some body from Abroad 4 thly I say That neither the Duke of Hanover nor any other Foreign Prince who is Related to the Royal Family is Guarantee to the Coronation Oath and the Oath of Allegiance which are the Terms of this Government 5 thly That if the Prince of Orange had not come in by the Sollicitation and Consent of the English People it had been a Proper Invasion 6 thly The Original Right which the People of England have to Defend themselves enables them to Call for Assistance whenever they are beâ—set and cannot help themselves and to Pray in Aid And here this Happy Revolution Centers For it would be a strange Thing to me That any Person who only looks over the Hedge should have more Right to Defend a Man's Freehold than the Owner himself who is upon the Premises And thus I have done with the Maxim about Defence and come at last to our Author's Touchstone of Maxims which is That all which tend to the inevitable Destruction of Cities and Societies as indiffeasable Allegiance does are False Maxims But what then is become of their Darling Maxim with which their Churches used to Ecchoe in the Exclusion-Time Fiat Iustitia pereat Mundus Let the Duke of York have his No Right though the World go to wreck For that was the true English of it True or False they have no Maxims nor Principles at all for they are steddy in none For is not Fiat Iustitia pereat Mundus as True a Maxim in an Abdication as in an Exclusion It is with some Assurance that I speak it because I have already proved it That Allegiance is a rigid obstinate unalterable and Indefeasible Thing and that it must be Dissolved by one of the two Parties themselves but is Impossible to be Dissolved by any Third Person I had but Two Maxims in the World in reference to State-matters the one was that Honesty is the Best Policy and the other was that Allegiance is Indefeasible and he is a going to take away my last Maxim from me which I will not part with because I have Sworn it to King William and Queen Mary I said I would not part with my Indiffesable Allegiance but he brings a whole Posse upon me to prove it false in these words And this is the Opinion in which all who have considered this Matter either as Lawyers as Casuists do agree Now I say That All his Lawyers and Casuists never said a word of Truth in their whole Lives For All Lawyers and Casuists are None and He having named No body I have Affronted No body But whenever he pleases to name his Lawyers and Casuists and produce their strong Reasons against my Indiffeasible Allegiance I will talk with them round In the mean time I am weary and break off here FINIS Books written by the Reverend Mr. Samuel Johnson JVlian the Apostate Being a short â—â—ount of his Life the Sense of the Primitive Châ—istians about his Succession and their Behaviour towards him Together with a Comparison of Popery and Paganism Iulian's Arts to undermine and extirpate Christianity Together with Answers to Constantius the Apostate and Iovian Remarks upon Dr. Shâ—rlock's Book intituled The Case of Resistance of the Supream Power stated and reâ—olved according to the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures Reflections on the History of Passive Obedience A second five Year's Struggle against Popery and Tyranny being a Collection of Papers published by the Reverend Mr. Samuel Iohnson during his last Imprisonment of five Years and ten Days Wherein are contained these following Tracts 1. A Sermon preached at Guildhall-Chappel 2. The Church of England as by Law established c. 3. Godly and wholsom Doctrine and necessary for these Times 4. A short Disswasive â—rom Popery and from Countenancing and Encouraging Papists 5. A Parcel of wry Reasons wrong Inferences but right Observator 6. An Oration of Mr. Iohn Hales 7. Several Reasons â—or the establishing a standing Army and the dissolving the Militia 8. Four Chapters 1. Oâ— Magistracy 2. Of Prerogative by Divine Right 3. Of Obedience 4. Of Laws 9. The Grounds and Reasons of the Laws against Popery 10. An Humble and Hearty Address to all the English Protestants in King Iames's Army 11. The Opinion that Resistance may be used in case our Religion and Rights should be invaded 12. The Trial and Examination of the New Test of the Church of England's Loyalty 13. Reflections upon the Instance of the Church of England's Loyalty 14. The absolute Impossibility of Transubstantiation demonstrated 15. Bishop Ridley's Letter to Bishop Hooper with some Observations on it 16. A Letter from a Freeholder to the rest of the Freeholders of England 17. Religion founded upon a Rock 18. The True Mother Church An Argument proving That the Abrogation of King Iames by the People of England from the Regal Throne and the Promotion of the Prince of Orange oâ—e of the Royal Family to the Throne of the Kingdom in his stead was according to the Constitution of the English Government and Prescribed by it In Opposition to all the false and treacherous Hypotheses of Usuâ—pation Conâ—quest Desertion and of taking the Powers that Are upon Content An Essay concerning Parliaments at a Certainty or the Kalends of May.