swallow up the Subjects right or the Subjects right the Kings just prerogative No dissolution ought to be of rule convayed by the consent of societyes into such and such hands but by the same power by which it had it's constitution This J grant being rightly understood but because the sense may be easily mistaken J shall enlarge my selfe upon it It is most agreeable to reason that the same power should by equall right abrogate as it did at first constitute For it is not possible any body should lay a necessary obligation upon it selfe to doe thus when it had liberty to doe otherwise except in relation to some other person to whom I may part with that right I had without possibility of recalling it And this either by actuall donation so when I have given away my money J cannot challenge it as due on my repentance or by promise which is an earnest of my performance In these cases J cannot use my liberty because it would be to the injury of another according to that rule grounded on great equity Nemo potest mutare consilium suum in alterius injuriam L nemo D. de reg jur In a popular state there is but one simple power and therefore the people upon consent may establish an Aristocracy or Monarchy when they please But in the other two where the authority is placed in the hands of a few or of one there are two parties in the contract and therefore even the whole people have not any power of dissolving this government unlesse this one or those few will voluntarily resigne up their power into those hands from which they received it and that such resignation be not to the injury of a third party It were strange if the people in subjecting it selfe to command should aime at any thing but it's own good in the first and last place No question rule and subjection divided paternall powers finding it necessary to yeeld to one Regall and instead of many to submit to one common father did spring from reason directing man-kind to its greatest convenience Therefore the people ayming chiefly at their own good yet perceiving this was not to be attained except they had a common protector to administer justice equally amongst them they found it necessary in a higher degree to provide for his good in recompense of their security and out of their particular estates to grant to him honourable demaines to whose care and justice they owed the peaceable possession of all So the good of either is mutually involved and that the people may be happy they must first provide for the happinesse of their ruler What followes I shall think unworthy any answer He breaks out into a most scandalous and false invective against the late government That the subject groaned under some grievances cannot be denied and we owe to the goodnesse of his Majestie that we are free even from the feare of them for the future J speak sincerely what I think though the wit of malice should set before us the most exact table of all our sufferings let it not impose upon us what we never felt and compare us to any other nation of the Christian world we in our worst times were least unhappy Because we have no reason to be in love with any evils I shall not endeavour to excuse them by comparison with our present miseries Though neither be desirable yet we are too sensible which we have justest reason to complain of I hope under this word protect the King intends not onely to shield us from all kinde of evill but to promote us also to all kinde of Politicall happinesse according to his utmost de voyre I never before did apprehend in the word Protect this large notion we may expect all happinesse from His goodnesse we cannot challenge it from His duty How should we conceave that the Prince is obliged by oath to take care for his people in such a degree as the most affectionate mother never yet took for her dearest children If it were so then all his Majesties Royall ancestors who did not provide for their people in such a high degree of happinesse as he by the advise of this present Parliament hath done were perjured as having all taken the oath to Protect Every particular subject hath a just title and may challenge an interest in whatsoever is meant by the word Protection Is the King therefore bound to promote every particular person to all kinds of politicall happinesse to advance all to honours offices power command Though all single persons ought to look upon the late Bills passed by the King as matters of Grace with all thankfulnesse and humility yet the King himselfe looking upon the whole state ought to acknowledge that he cannot merit of it c. all hath proceeded but from his meere duty It was believed heretofore the greatest happinesse of a Prince that he was able his greatest glory to be willing to oblige his people But now he is made not capable of doing any courtesie When he hath done all that he can he hath discharged the duty of a trusty servant I am confident never any age was guilty of the like irreverence and disrespect to Princes as is shewne in this book If all single persons ought to look upon the late bills passed by the King as matters of Grace then they truly are so for no obligation can lay upon a man to believe things otherwise then they are This ground destroyes the power of beneficence in a Prince and the duty of gratitude in Subjects We should think it very hard if we who are but subjects should be dealt with by the same rule All owe a duty to their King to their country yet upon extraordinary services we beleive we deserve well of both The example of the House of Commons will better instruct him who have severall times presented their thanks and humble acknowledgment of his Majesties gracious favours and have likewise received thanks from most Counties in the Kingdome for procuring those bills so beneficiall to the subject and yet surely the trust reposed in them by those that chose them and the end for which they met did no lesse oblige them in point of duty to doe whatsoever might conduce to the generall good of the Kingdome The King ought not to account that a profit or strength to him which is a losse and wasting to the people nor ought he to think that perisht to him which is gained to the people By the same argument the people may share all that he hath and he is bound to believe he has lost nothing If King and people have severall rights what law is there which binds the King suo jure cedere and enables the people to preserve their rights nay to challenge his And if they have not but the interests of King and people be either altogether one and the same or so inseparably united as they cannot be severed then it
able to hinder His good people from enjoying the full benefits of His Royall Grace if such a consent appear to Him to doe it The following discourse keeps all in generalls which easily deceive weaker apprehensions and hath its strength from this ground that it cannot reasonably be supposed the great publique Councell of the Kingdome should not give the most faithfull advice Therefore Princes if they may not be led by their owne opinions rather then by the sacred and awfull Councells of whole Nations unreasonably complain they are denyed liberty of Conscience and ravisht out of their own understandings I appeal to any mans judgment whether any thing can be urged for the authority of a Lay-Councell that it ought to enforce a submission of judgment a performance of dutyes arising from trust agreeable thereto which may not with at least equall advantages be pressed for the same binding power in Councells Ecclesiasticall To instance in that of Trent if a Papist should as Campian doth bragg of that to him as the representative body of almost all the Western Church wherein was a concourse of so many choise able eminent Divines such as had addicted their whole times to the study of truth and therefore in all probability could not be deceived themselves such as had conversed so long with Heaven and Heavenly things they knew sufficiently how much it concerned them not to deceive others and conclude it therefore unlawfull for any to pretend conscience which is but private opinion against so publique and unanimous determination Notwithstanding these high probabilities and what will much more justify mens absolute obedience and captivating their reasons some plausible arguments for a divine assistance and immediate directions in all their decisions which the Houses will not pretend to yet it shall goe hard but he will find some answer as esily he might whereby to justifie his liberty of dissenting in some things which when he hath done he may with very little alteration apply to civill Councells and be satisfied Suppose it thus though amongst probable Arguments that drawn from authority of wise men carry with it greatest weight yet it must give place to a greater reason Now to every man belongs a judgment of discretion which must decide for what concernes his particular duty So in the Kings case the Votes which carry in them the authority of both Houses shall bear great sway and if it be in things extreamly dubious they may turn the scales of their side But if greater reason seem to contradict them his Majesty will not hoodwink His understanding and blindly follow whither they please to lead him He will walke by the greater Light For example his Majesty perceiving how much His people may suffer under arbitrary power is resolved never to make use of it thinks it lesse fitting any other should But it is told him now the use of it will be for their good by reason of apparent imminent dangers His Majesty understands the bottome of plausible pretences knows to how great mischiefes a way would be opened if it were sufficient upon such specious grounds to have a right to over-rule all known and certain Lawes Concerning the action at Hull he confesses to take possession of the Kings town and shut the gates against Him is Treason if circumstances doe not vary the nature of the act as in this Case he pretends they doe For the first thing to be lookt on is that the King was meerly denyed entrance for that time His generall right was not denyed If then a Subject take up Armes against his Soveraign in a temporary warr it must not come within the compasse of Treason and he may legally possesse himselfe of the King's forts and maintaine them against Him so He confesse he hath no right in them No defying language was given If a man take away my purse shall he be acquitted from felony because he did not give me ill language too No act of violence was used This he may say who hath pickt anothers pocket but it is no sufficient plea against the Law But he used no violence though the King for diverse houres together did stand within Musket shot c It is no argument of innocence that he had opportunity to be more highly guilty and abstained The King used tearmes of defiance and this makes the act meerly defensive or rather passive If this were true there was never any warr but defensive for those who by some great injustice offered provoke a Nation to right it self fight as well to maintain their lives as what they unlawfully possesse How this should administer to the King any ground to leavy guards at York many men wonder or that it should seem the same thing to the King as if He had been pursued to the gates of York Certainly it was a sufficient ground not only to raise a guard for His safety but an Army to punish that high indignity and right His Honour but out of tender care of His Peoples safety least they should chance to suffer upon mistakes He afforded him so long time of repentance that the Kingdome might first be satisfyed and then his justice If the Parliament have hereupon turned any of the Townes-men out of their Estates His Majesty did not charge the two Houses Sir Iohn Hotham kept Him out without any publike order from them But if it had been done de facto the same law would have justified this act as well as the other But since not only the Country about but the Inhabitants within the Town have suffered in their Estates and libertyes Or if claimed any interest in it to themselves So much the lesse reason to seize on it if he cannot so much as pretend title to it or have disseized the King utterly denying the right for the future If any Law can be produced to justifie taking away the Kings goods for a time the case will be cleered Or have made any other use of their possession but meerly to prevent civill warr There is not any way more likely to create a Civill warr then endeavours to prevent it by illegall courses And to disfurnish the King's seducers of Armes Ammunition therefore the most essentiall property of Treason intention must needs here be absent in this act The Law hath judged otherwise in the case of the Earle of Essex whose plea was he intended the removall of evill Counsellors If the Parliament the shutting the King out of Hull was not their act be not vertually the whole Kingdome it selfe The King excluded it is not If it be not the Supream judicature as well in matters of State as matters of Law Till new lawes are enacted the Subject cannot justify any act but what is warrantable by the old If it be not the great Councell of the Kingdome as well as of the King to whom it belongeth by the consent of all Nations to provide in all extraordinary cases â—e quid detriment capiat
Respublica let the brand of Treason stick upon it No provisions are allowed but what are legall least the Remedy should prove the greatest disease Nay if the Parliament would have used this forcible meanes unlesse petitioning would not have prevailed It is no just excuse to take away a mans money and say he did first desire him to deliver it Or if their grounds of jealousy were meerly vaine It is against all equity to doe wrong because there is a possibility of suffering it no man can have a full security and therefore we must arme our selves against uncertain feares not by injuries but a wary innocence Or if the jealousy of a whole Kingdom can be counted vaine Too large an expression much the greater part of the Kingdom apprehend no just grounds of jealousies Though the mindes of many were a long time unsetled being daily disturbed by suggestitons of plots at home and invasions from abroad yet if we duly weigh the businesse such fears ought not to be valued If forty severall men reporte the same thing yet if upon examination thirty nine of them say they had it from the other man this in Law makes but one witnesse so the fears of many thousands if grounded upon informations and those informations come from very few who can no way evidence the probability of such reports they ought not to be regarded they will vanish into nothing Or if they claime any such right of judging of dangers and preventing them without the King's consent as ordinary and perpetuall As often as they have a mind to make use of such a right 't is easy for them to call the case extraordinary and pretend a publike danger For my part I know not how they can ever be confuted if not now For certainly apparent dangers did never lesse appeare It would more abundantly have satisfied me if I had been frighted with secret plots and conceald designes The King might have prevented the same repulse by sending a messenger before hand That is if He had not come to get in He had not been shut out if He would have stayed away he would not have denyed Him entrance Or by coming without any such considerable forces Let His forces be great he was not to give Law to his Prince but neither is it likely he would have admitted Him then for you confesse a little above He offered to enter Hull with twenty horse only unarmed The Scots in England took New-castle but by private authority yet there were other qualifications in that act sufficient to purge it of Treason The King and Parliament deserved so much respect from you as not to have instanced so frequently in their Act you might well let that passe in silence which they have buried in an Act of oblivion He flourishes at large upon the example of Richard the second he means Edw. 2. misled by Spencer It doth not follow because one King hearkned to evill counsell therefore all must be denied the liberty to hearken to good Spencer's party was but of inconsiderable fortunes He will get no advantage by putting mens estates into the Scales and ballancing their reputations At length yet there is some little hopes he may prove a convert since he doth almost promise to suspend his judgement till he may have full satisfaction from His Majesties Narration which in due time will more fully informe him An Aristocracy in Parliament cannot be erected withoutsome means and what this means shall be is yet to us altogether inscrutable Certainly he is quicker sighted then not to perceive what is so obvious Deny the King a negative and the thing is done The power of Parliaments is but derivative and depending upon publique consent and how publique consent should be gained for the erection of a new unlawfull odious Tyranny amongst us is not discernable It is not thought this was the intent of those that entrusted them but it may be the abuse of power if the Kings authority be once swallowed up in theirs For though their power depend upon a publique consent in the election yet not so after they are met together The necessities of the time made His Majesty grant that this Parliament should not be dissolved without their consent but they may now challenge it as their right if the King be bound to confirme what they vote necessary or expedient But it cannot be and his reason is the Kingdom would not obey them In truth a very probable thing I beleeve they would not be able to goe through in that new way But yet they must needs have a great party considering their severall relations and the advantage they have in advancing the interests whether religious or civill of some which may be able to doe them service and this would create division in the Kingdom His Majesty expresses His just indignation that they He imputes it not to the Houses though this Author still involve them but to the contrivers penners of the Declaration should dare to tell their King they may without want of modesty or duty depose him He returnes answer this cannot be collected from those words That if they should make the highest presidents of other Parliaments their patterne there would be no cause to complain of want of modesty and duty because it may justly be denied that free Parliaments did ever truly consent to the dethroning of any King of England What was there affirmed of Parliaments had none of his present restriction of Free in it If the â— of Hen. 4. Were indeed not Free why were Statutes cited out of it The authors of those quotations must be presumed to accompt it so The King is offended at their franck expressions disguised under the charge of a malignant party The sense of his answer is this they have no other way to cleere themselves for there being faults somewhere not to lay them upon others were to take them upon themselves His Majesty hath proposed a very good way which will fully satisfy the world in their innocency and that is not alwaies to accuse but sometimes to prove The King demands justice for tumults and high indignities offered and complaines of a prohibition sent from the House of Commons into Southwarke to hinder the processe against a Riot according to Law His answer is equall justice could not be obtained against the Court-Cavaleeres His Majesty never protected them from legall tryall it was free for them to have proved what they could against them The Kingsaies it being granted by them that their priviledges doe not extend to Treason Felony or breach of the Peace so as to exempt the Members from all manner of tryall yet if they be so priviledged in the method of their tryall that the cause must first be brough before them and their consent asked before you can proceed then their Priviledges extend as farre in these as in the most unquestioned cases because no priviledge exempts them from all manner of tryall the House being acquainted and
We knew how to obey when such seditious fellowes out of their Pulpits did dare to strike even at the highest and with more boldnesse because with lesse danger as meaning to fight with other mens hands If the King could be more wisely or faithfully advised by any other Court or if His single judgment were to be preferd before all advice whatsoever it were not onely vaine but extreamly inconvenient that the whole Kingdome should be troubled to make elections and that the parties elected should attend the publike businesse There are other Ends besides this for which they are called together yet this is one main end as appears by the Kings writ and therefore He never refused to advise with them The usuall but not the onely forme of the Kings Answers to such Bills as they were not willing to passe which I beleeve was never objected to any Prince before to His Majesty le Roy s' avisera proves that after the advice of this His great Councell He is yet at liberty to advise further with persons or occasions as His owne wisdome shall think meet But this Author will by no meanes take notice that the use of Counsell is to perswade not to compell as if a man in a businesse of great concernment might not very prudently consult with many friends and yet at last follow the advice perhaps of one if it appeare more proportionable to the end he aymes at Not so because the many eyes of so many choise Gentlemen out of all parts see more then fewer This Argument I beleeve will conclude too much and therefore nothing at all For the same reason which denyes a liberty of dissenting to the King that is such a number who see more because they are more may deny it to the House of Pears in comparison of the House of Commons and to that House too in comparison of the People and so both King and Lords and Commons are voted out of Parliament Besides experience shews this rule is not generally true for I dare say if we ask almost any Parliament man he will tell us upon the reading of a Bill sometimes one man in the House hath found more faults and urged more just exceptions then three hundred would have been able to espy There have been Parliaments wherein Acts have been made to remedy former mistakes Nay whole Parliaments have been repeal'd and declared Null by succeeding Parliaments so 21. Rich. 2. cap. 12. does voyd and disanull all the Statutes made in a former Parliament held 11. Rich. 2. so 1. Hen. 4. cap. 3. repeales this whole Parliament of 21. Rich. 2. So 39. Hen. 6. In a Statute made at Westminster We find a totall repeal of a Parliament held at Coventry the yeare before as made against all good faith and conscience c the Acts and Statutes laboured by the conspiracy procurement and excitation of some ill disposed Persons for the introduction and accomplishment of their rancour and inordinate Covetise So 49. Hen. 6. A Parliament held at Westminster is made Null in regard diverse matters had there been treated and wrought by the laboured exhortation of Persons not fearing God nor willing to be under the rule of any earthly Prince but inclined of sensuall appetite to have the whole governance of the Realme under their owne power and domination These are the testimonies that one great Councell bestowes upon another I could urge the same Arguments in the very same words onely â—â—anging a Lay-councell into an Ecclesiasticall Councell and upon equall necessity require the King to assent to what ever they shall vote I make no doubt the Author will in this case give him leave to make his conscience his guide and if he doe he will think his Arguments deserve no further answer The few private ends they can have to deprave them must needs render their counsells more faithfull impartiall and religious then any other Certainly they may have as many as any other private Subject and that this Kingdome hath seldome heretofore suffered under the prosecution of private interest is to be imputed to the excellent policy which he endeavours to overthrow They are strangely transported with the love of a popular state who can so overrule their understandings as to force themselves to think the members of it may not be extreamly subject to ambition which would easily prompt them to alter the good old wayes of bestowing Offices and collating Honours to covetousnesse which would tempt them to draw the determination of causes out of the ordinary Courts of Iustice to hatred which would make them prosecute their enimies with bitter violence and upon the least suspition of a fault to punish them first by imprisonments and to prove them guilty at leasure to affection which would make them shield their friends from being questioned though their corruptions were notorious to all the world The Bishop of Durham his case speaks home to the businesse we are told in the 3. c. of the 2. Parliament held 1. Mar. how the Bishoprick of Durham was dissolved in a former Parliament 7. Edw. 6. which was compassed and brought to passe by the sinister labour great malice and corrupt means of certain ambitious persons then being in Authority rather for to enrich themselves and their friends with a great part of the possessions of the said Bishoprick then upon just occasion or Godly zeale Let the world judge whether this Age may not be subject to the same temptation and whether a desire to share the means of the Church may not have as strong operations as formerly Nothing more common in the Roman story then the bribing of the Senate This made Jugurtha cry out who by his guifts governed their Parliament O Vrbem venalem maturè perituram si emptorem invenerit Had it been our unhappinesse to have lived in a popular state except they are altered from what Histories deliver them we should have found injustice a trade and that the most compendious way to wealth was to buy no land but of the Judges Tacitus gives us a full character of what we might well feare When the government of Rome was changed into a Monarchy under Augustus the Provinces were very well contented Suspecto Senatûs populique imperio obcertamen Potentium avaritiam Magistratuum invalido legum auxilio quae vi ambitu postremò pecuniâ turbabantur They must evidently have more private ends then the King who may be mislead upon wantonnesse but they must struggle with solid temptations desire of riches desire of honours there being an emptinesse in them whereas He is full and satisfied Si violandum est Jus regni causâ violandum est the greatest motive that can be a hope to share in Soveraignty the Parliament to rule the King and they to rule the Parliament We have ever found enmity and antipathy betwixt the Court and the Country but never any till now betwixt the representatives and the body of the Kingdom represented How