are truly transferred and now really in Him is very evident because else we should be bound to obey our Fathers commands before those of the King For divine precept stands in full force Honour thy Father c. and therefore we musts confesse tam pater nemo est in terris he that begot us is not so much our Father as the King is It may be fit to take notice here that the supreme power of a State hath by our particular deeds and common agreement as much right over not single persons onely but the whole body as every Father had over not this or that child onely but his whole family and as he cannot be said though major singulis natis yet totâ prole minor so neither a King if this power be placed in one which is essentiall to a Monarchy minor universis Though a Monarch hath greater right and larger power then even all the people could bestow upon him for he hath potestatem vitae necis He hath power of a higher nature from Gods grant and this Fathers have not now over their children over themselves it can only come from him who hath dominion over his creatures and therfore the people must looke upon him not only as their owne but as Gods representative yet to say nothing of this and to deale liberally with our adversaries by supposing though I cannot grant their principles true concerning the originall of power being in the people I can demonstrably convince them by most plaine and evident deductions from their owne scheame I tooke this method in my Answer to the Observations that by joyning issue upon their owne grounds I might put a quicker end to the debate It would have required more time to shew at large The Kings power was from God which was proved in briefe and there as is this discourse it is acknowledged to be restrained by His own or His Progenitors grants potest enim Rex vim regni minuere and so of much higher nature then the contribution of popular Votes could raise it to it was aboundantly sufficient to prove that the people have not any legall power against the King The former is built upon this pillar nemo dat quod non habet the power of the Magistrate was not in the people considered severally and before civill society and in such a State as the Aborigenes are described by Salust genus hominum agreste sine legibus sine imperio liberum atque solutum a multitude not a nation and certaine wild routs without Laws without Empire free to doe or suffer wrong and loose from all positive obligations Not any one having jus gladii a right to take away the life of man it followes they could not bestow it upon another for what is not cannot be alienated And therefore the supreame Magistrate hath more power then the whole people and is vice Deus Gods vicegerent Let them take heed how they call Gods minister the peoples Servant God hath taken especiall care the Magistrate should be honoured and respect is due as to his not their creature The latter that the people have not any legall power against the King is as firmely supported by another pillar nemo habet quod dedit Suppose the originall of power in the people or as they love to speake suppose them the efficient cause of power which cannot be but by giving to one man in a Monarchy to a Senate in an Aristocracy a right to use their divided strengths Since therefore they cannot retaine what they have parted with nor have what they gave away he which hath all their power I may adde his owne particular besides must needs be greater and more powerfull then they The truth is he is in a Monarchy and they are in an Aristocracy the only fountaine of all power and justice Answer to the Observat pag. 10. This is as certaine as that there are some governments besides Democracy for it is essentiall to them what is that which makes Anarchy except this that every man hath right to doe what he will Demonstration from the difference of formes of Regiment in reference to any nationall Law The only meanes to avoyd this confusion is to resigne up this hurtfull liberty which is very prudently done upon choice but necessarily upon conquest if it be given to one wee call that State Monarchy if to few wee call it Optimacy if to very many who rule by turnes and are elected by the people wee call it Democracy There cannot be any other ground to difference the formes of Regiment Hence appeares the weaknesse of those discourses which have no other strength then the impossibility that the people can make one greater and more powerfull then all they which is understood not of their naturall this cannot be past away to another but politique strength that is the right of using their power this may be and is parted with except the Governement be a Democracy because Quicquid efficit tale est magis tale The reply to the Answer to the Observations confesses my argument concluding if it were true that the people had parted with their power pag. 6. upon this the determination of the whole controversie depends and that it was rightly stated by me will evidently appeare because unlesse the people have resigned up their power the Author can never shew how this State is a Monarchy It doth not alter the case that the King hath restrained himselfe from the use of this power to some purposes without their consent as for making new lawes or raising money for this limitation only makes such acts illegall but doth not returne any power into them whereby they may be inabled to raise an Army or to oppose the Militia of the Kingdome against him to compell him by strong hand to governe according to law If the subject of this power be the people who may meet together and lawfully determine for though he resolve all into the two Houses yet if he follow the consequences of his owne principle he must goe thus high what they fancy conducing to their own safety wee are cleerly falne back into Anarchy To avoid this confusion the Author places it in their representatives but it will come to the same thing by undenyable deductions from his owne grounds For the same arguments which are made against the King equally conclude against the two Houses since Quicquid efficit tale Arguments brought against the King conclude as much for the people against the Parliament est magis tale and that they are intrusted for the common good may be equally applyed to them and then King and Lords and Commons are Voted away at the pleasure of the multitude The summe of his Book is that the people retain their power and therefore may make resistance in case he governe not according to law and he is responsable for such breaches The proofe is He is intrusted for their good and there is a mutuall covenant
Armes then twenty if twenty be accused and then a hundred then a thousand then ten thousand if ten thousand be accused and so more or lesse as occasion serves for there is the same reason for two as for one for a hundred as for twenty for a thousand as for a hundred and take away this power from the Parliament and 't is no longer a Parliament But the King and His Forefathers have by Law setled these Liberties of Parliament and therefore according to Lawes they have ae power to send for by force those that are accused to be tryed before them which they cannot doe unlesse they raise an Army when the accused are kept from them by an Army Master Bridge in his Wound consci pag. 6. Answ First the House of Commons is no Court of justice it hath indeed by speciall priviledge for it's better regulation power over it's owne members to imprison or turne out and this power though at any time abused against justice and equity and contrary to the trust reposed in them both by King and people as if men should be committed for delivering their opinions freely because their reason was not so happy as to concurre with the sense of the House which may possibly be the passions of the major part or if some should be accused and others past by though of knowne guilt in the very same particulars as having an hand in monopolies c. and so not the cause but the person he made the measure of right wrong yet this misused authority hath the effects of justice and right makes the act legally valid But the House of Commons hath no jurisdiction over those who are without except at most in case of breach of Priviledge it cannot judge or condemne any no not so much as examine upon oath so that the argument is the Parliament that is the House of Lords as the highest Court of justice may legally raise an army without the consent nay against the command of the King it concludes too without the consent and if they please against the expresse will of the Commons declared to the contrary This doctrine once since this Parliament sate would not have been so pleasing to the lower House that they would have taken care for printing it by Order from their Committee There was a time when one of this House professed openly he hoped to see that skie fall too and the Lords were put in minde they sate but in personall capacities whereas Knights were shires and Burgesses were townes and Cities and therefore it was thought fit to give them warning and to admonish them to take heed how they thwarted the representative Kingdome Secondly by the same reason Judges of inferiour Courts out of Parliament at least may raise an army to fetch in delinquents if the framers of this objection had consulted with those Sages they would have better instructed them in the lawes In cases of such high consequences it was the custome of the House of Peeres to advise with these Oracles to take directions from them at least to know their opinion and the reasons of it because they had employed their whole time and studies to finde out the true meaning of the lawes Thirdly To discover their mistake and the inconsequence of the argument There is the same reason for twenty as for one and so for an hundred for a thousand for an army c. The reason is not the same because when a few are sent out the administration of justice doth not indanger the common peace But because a warre doth put the whole Kingdome in manifest perill of being ruined therefore when either reall delinquents or pretended to be so are so many as to make the tryall doubtfull the liberty and right of inferiour Magistrates to fetch them in by force is in this case restrained by expresse lawes which provides very prudently that no warre shall be made except authorized by the supreame governour And therefore also the lawes permit the King to pardon all offences against his crowne and dignity supposing he will doe it as sometimes out of goodnesse of nature so sometimes out of the strength of his understanding because not mercy only but wisedome and prudence may prevaile with him to forget offenders when they are so potent that the uncertaine punishment of nocents for the worst cause may prevaile as in the case of the tribe of Benjamin so Victrix causa Deis placuit sed victa â—atoni must be bought with the unavoydable destruction of many innocent and gallant persons Wherefore Serjeants at armes and officers may be sent by the House of Peeres and consequently by Judges of inferiour Courts and ordinary Justices to force delinquents to appearance though their crime ought to be specified for to call them malignants or delinquents is no legall charge if they be not so many as that they make such resistance as cannot be punished without an Army for a civill warre endangers all and begets more faults then it punishes and therefore the lawes referre the ordering of the common-wealth to him who is supreme least inferiour magistrates violently carried on should out of indiscreet zeale to justice expose the Kingdome to contributions plunderings and thousand remedilesse injuries more greivous then those they seeke to punish Exc. Warre against the person of the King is not resistance of the higher power but warre against his authority only Buchanan right Non igitur hîc Paulus de iis qui magistratum gerunt agit sed de ipso magistratu h. e. de functione officio eorum qui alis praesunt dial de jur reg Answ This separation of the officer from the office which hath created bella plusquam civilia the King in this army fighting against himselfe in the opposite army is made without all colour or shadow of reason for though the authority of the King be some times where his person is not yet his person cannot be where his authority is not This is evident by the 25. Edw. 3. c. 2. which makes it Treason to compasse the Kings death by which must be meant to endeavour his personall ruine because Regall authority never dyes in England I have shewed formerly that by not resisting powers is meant not resisting persons invested with such power For when Saint Paul hath forbid to resist the power he explaines it by adding a reason drawne from the persons in authority to encourage them to obedience for Rulers are not a terror to good workes and so after for they are Gods Ministers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the masculine gender which cannot be applyed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he might leave no ground of scruple but plainly instruct us that honour is due to their persons and that all resistance to their persons is sinne because of their authority Saint Peter is as cleare Submit your selves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake whether it be to the King as Supreme or unto Governours
and make use of the impatience of distempered men to compasse their owne ends though I say such a sullennesse would make the Kingdome miserable yet it is their right to deny the most reasonable proposall and there is not any legall remedy against inconveniences which will certainely flow from hence Neither necessity nor propterea quòd regnum nostrum periclitatur which is the same with saius populi suprema lex can enable the King justly to provide for the Kingdomes safety by raising money against the known Lawes he may in this case dissolve the assembly and onely use such meanes as are not contrary to Law By reason of these negative voices and the Kings right as to call together so to breake up that great councell there was not any hope of new moulding this State to particular Interesses and therefore these unequall compositions of the House of Commons had no influence to the disadvantage of the Commonwealth Yet now wee may probably suffer under them if this new doctrine take place That the Kings consent is past and involved in the Lords and Commons for the next rub of the Lords negative is removeable by the same Logicke of Coordinata se supplent and that the people may not perish for defect of a supplementall Law it was essayed formerly that they sitting in personall capacities should not oppose what conduced to the safety of the Kingdome represented by the Commons and those two grounds being laid as the King and Lords are voted out of Parliament so it is very probable the Gentry would be but very thinne in the House of Commons upon new election hereafter because the disposall of all would be put into their hands whose interests are most disjoyned from the publique tranquility as enjoying least by the present establishment in this State From hence it is apparent what confusion were likely to follow and the short experience we have had hath already too fully acquainted us with the miserable consequences To answer distinctly to their axiome coordinates supply each others failing if it should be understood in that sense which they plead for that the King failing to performe his duty the Lords and Commons are enabled to transact businesses without him by vertue of this rule upon the very same grounds the King and House of Commons may exclude the Lords the King and Lords may exclude the Commons but this being destructive of the fundamentall priviledge and right of either House this onely can be meant by it in the present case that the power of any one or two of them is defective to some purposes expressely named in our lawes as for enacting new lawes or raising money upon the Subject without a joint consent of all three This interpretation is very reasonable but it concludes against them and forthe King for he requires nothing but what our Lawes grant him and what he alwaies acknowledged equally their due a right to a negative voice in those things to which the three estates are coordinate The use of it cannot be injurious for a deniall to bring in a new governement doth not take away the old it leaves us in that happinesse which our Fathers were content with Exc. All other matters wherein the exercise of His supreame power is not restrained by making their consent a necessary condition without which it cannot be actuated he may manage solely as for instance he may and ought to protect His Subjects and to make use of those meanes with which the law hath invested him to enable him to compasse that end and these are the Militia or armes of the Kingdome Answ The King though he be singulis major yet he is universis minor I am forced to take notice in the first place of that lamentable sophistry which yet hath deceived many # though it hath bin often discovered they still persist to abuse the people with it The strength of all their discourses depends upon this syllogisme the Parliament is greater then the King the assumption is built upon a false foundation The two Houses are the Parliament Ergo the two Houses are greater then the King The proposition is granted because Parliament includes King and Lords and Commons and his legislative power as to the use of it is so restrained that it cannot be legally exercised without their consent and this obtained in Parliament it becomes absolute to those purposes to which they passe their assent 25. H. 8. 21. So that the onely meaning is he can do more in Parliament then out of it But the minor is absolutely false for the King is caput Parliamenti and so an essentiall part of Parliament I am ashamed to bring quotations out of the lawyers to prove what is so manifestly true For if the King were not a necessary part of the Parliament the Parliament as it is being rightly understood for the head and body were the whole Realme then we should have a Kingdome without any King Object One objection is frequently urged there must be a Parliament somewhere for it cannot be dissolved without their consent which is not yet past but it is not at Oxford nor no other place London excepted therefore it is there and consequently the Houses are the Parliament without the King or else His authority is in their votes Answ The want of Logique hath proved as fatall to this Kingdome as the want of conscience I cannot determine which hath had the strongest influence in our calamities the malice of some or the ignorance of others Suppose the Lords should remove their House out of the City as they have an undoubted right so to doe upon the agreement of the major part and there might be some motives for it for to say nothing else their number would be more then doubled where would these men place the Parliament If the King and Lords should legally sit in Oxford were the House of Commons thereby excluded from being a part or could they be concluded the whole Parliament It is not an union in respect of place but an union of their assent and the Royall ratification which actuates the power into a law The Kings absence doth not destroy the being of Parliament no more then if he should dissent being present nor doth it forfeit his power into their disposall as you may see 33. H. 8. c. 21. His assent by his letters patent is and ever was of as good strenght and force as though the Kings person had beene there personally present and had assented openly and publiquely to the same But what if he dissent from them and refuse to confirme their votes Then they ought not to have the force of lawes no more then if the King and Lords should agree on any thing the Commons contradicting it neither is a legall establishment If they say his obstinate refusall voides the Parliament for it is made of no use if it may not be active when deserted by him and except he please to establish their
ordinances The King might as well presse the Commons to consent to what he and the Lords shall thinke fitting because otherwise they void the Parliament for it is of no use if it may not be active without their assent which they resolve not to passe This constitution of the negative voyce in either of the three estates was made in favour of the present governement the goods of which were knowne by experience that no innovation the evills of which are hardly discovered before tryall might be introduced without a joint consent of all three The whole Kingdome is greater then the King Answ If they meane by whole Kingdome both King and people it is very true but nothing pertinent for it onely signifies that the head is not so great as it self and the rest of the body But if they understand as they must if they meane to conclude any thing the body in opposition to their Soveraigne it is false that universitas subjectorum est major Rege The same reason which makes him above one makes him above two and so above ten so ten thousands so ten millions of thousands for their assembling together doth not dispense with their duty of alleagiance many or few alters not the quality of the act an universall revolt from a lawfull Soveraigne is equally Rebellion as a particular defection of one or more Countyes The Orators art is much used in these unhappy times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 misdemeanors were once raised into high Treason and now evident treason is lessened into necessary defence That rhapsody of quotations intituled the treachery and disloyalty of Papists to their Soveraignes c. brings a very merry plea to take them off from being Traytors The stat of the 25 Edw. 3. c. 2. runnes in the singular number if a man shall levy warre against the King c. it ought to be judged high Treason therefore it extends not to the Houses who are many and publique persons p. 31. If he had sadly considered how deeply conscience is ingaged in the present warre against the King he would not have endeavoured to seduce so many into Rebels and make them forfeit their soules upon such pittifull subtilties If forraigners should inquire under what kind of government wee live the answer must be wee live over a King Certainly they will much wonder at the unnecessary humility of the Houses they challenging to themselves superiority as the representative all and conclude them very great Courtiers who in their addresses to the Prince their Subject stile themselves His Majesties most loyall and faithfull Subjects the Lords and Commons in Parliament They will shrewdly suspect if Majesty be His due that Supremacy is so also while Rome was a popular State the supreme dignity being in the people was expressed by majestas populi Romani and after when they had resigned up their power to Emperours it was changed into Augustalis Majestas taken for the person of the Emperour Câ—ubi apud quem l. cum scimus or Imperialis majestas C. de quadriennii praesc I bene à Zenone and so Keyserlich Maiestaet at this day for the German Emperour The custome of petitioning him and such humility in the title of their addresses and the preface suppose it should reach no further yet it cannot be wholely taken of by the imperiousnesse of the matter Some of that side seeme to be scrupled at it and therefore plaine scottish tells you they hold Declarations to be more sutable to the soveraignty of so supreme a Court whose power is coordinate with Princes wee must hold superior then petitions I have proved in a former discourse that the King is supreme head not in respect of single persons but the universitas subjectorum For this is comprehended in body politique compact of all sorts and degrees of people which is sayd to owe next to God a naturall and humble obedience 24 H. 8. c. 12. And it is evident that hee is not the head of this or that man but of all the members in conjunction of the whole body for else he would be the head of millions of bodies and by consequence have as many distinct Kingdoms as particular Subjects It is needlesse to multiply quotations as the 25. H. 8. 21. This your Graces Realme recognises no superior under God but only your Grace or Queene Elizabeths publique declaration that shee had next under God the highest and supreme government and power over all Estates of the Realme of England Ecclesiasticall or Temporall Camd. hist pag. 31. I will summe up the reasons in briefe which prove that the King is not minor universis First if the Houses are above Him He hath no right of Empire upon them because inferior in superiorem non habet imperium but this is false for they are subject by Law to His commands when he bids them come they are bound to come and when he bids them goe they are bound to go that is when he calls them by his Writ they ought to attend praescriptis die loco and he prorogues the assembly or dissolves it when he thinks fitting It is no prejudice to this right that he was graciously pleased to restraine the exercise of it in this present Parliament without their consent to the end those vast debts which were brought upon this Kingdome might be discharged and in order to that good security might be given to such persons as were willing to ingage their estates for the benefit of the common-wealth I will make no advantage by urging their abuse of trust by which they were enabled to take off that great burthen which they have made infinitely more heavy and whereas they might in short time have eased this State our debts hourely grow upon us and the Subjects estates are but the fuell to feed that fire which sensibly consumes this unhappy Nation Notwithstanding they have deceived both King and people yet His Majesty cannot satisfie Himselfe in their Logique and suffer Himselfe to be perswaded he may lawfully reassume His right because they doe contrary to trust Though the perpetuity of this Parliament was never intended and it hath beene of most pernicious consequence yet the King will not allow Himselfe any liberty to dissolve it against law upon most reall good intentions Because the president is full of danger and though in the present case it would be used for the benefit of His people yet hereafter it probably might be abused to their greater disadvantage Secondly the division of all persons in this Land is into King and Subjects liege Lord and liege people and therefore they must be placed in the latter ranke It is a strange phansie to abstract the body politique from all the particulars whereof it is compacted and to salve the Oath of Allegiance by telling us the universe or body politique never swore alleagiance or supremacy to the King neither is it possible it should Reply to answer to
that trust committed to Him by God and the Law for the benefit and protection of His people He is desired of signe the Bill for abolition of Episcopacy that which acquainted this Land with Christianity and to diminish the Rights of the Church and take away Ecclesiasticall revenues that He may be remembred in story as the unfortunate instrument to pull downe what the charity of many ages hath beene building and to destroy many pious Monuments and glorious testimonies of our forefathers christianity and to ruine what the devotion of our godly Ancestors hath contributed for the encouragement of learning and advancement of Religion To say nothing to the politique part how the Ecclesiasticall and Civill State are so interwoven that the foundation of the whole may thereby be shaken and how there are very good reasons to suspect a Presbyteriall Government will prove extreamely prejudiciall to Monarchy I shall speake only to the religion of this request And first I would willingly know whether there be such a sinne as wee have hitherto used to call Sacriledge so severely punished upon the Heathens the violation of things dedicated to false Deities being notoriously revenged by the true God and so extreamly abhorr'd by all good Christians in former ages and then whether Magistrates have any dispensation to commit Sacriledge innocently by which private men incurre a lasting infamie and eternall damnation Secondly I would willingly be satisfied in this Quaere whether the King having sworne to preserve the Rights and Immunities of the Church intire can innocently consent supposing Him fully informed in the nature of that right which belongs to His Clergy for the most religious Prince may be subject to mistake to lessen or abrogate them except released by the consent of that Body to whom He is obliged This poynt rightly stated I shall only offer it to be seriously meditated on without any peremptory determination may confirme the Lands of the Church for the future to the great improvement of our civill happinesse For besides that wee might reasonably promise to our selves a blessing from the Almighty if wee shew our selves as carefull to setle those Rights which tend to the advancement of his worship by a firme establishment of a certaine and honourable maintenance for his more immediate servants as wee are justly sollicitous to secure our secular interests by making provision that no mans Rights shall be alienated without the owners consents a great temptation and that which seemes to have the strongest influence in all attempts of innovation would thereby be cut off the hopes of repairing their decayed fortunes with the spoyls of the Church Wee shall find in stories that most of those stormes which disturbed former calmes and by which this Kingdome sundry times hath beene miserably shaken were raised only with intention to sinke the Church by such as promised to themselves considerable shares in the wreck Some answer He is equally sworne to the observation of Lawes but these He may alter with advice of both Houses Thus one I doe not conceive Him more bound to defend them by His Oath then the rest of the Lawes enacted any of which when the Kingdome desires should be abrogated I hope is done without perjury That which is commonly called the Lawyers Answer to D◠Ferne. p. 31. This doth by no meanes take of my scruple because His Oath to defend the Lawes enacted is made populo Anglicano to His people and so as all other promises by consent of the partyes to whom a right was transferred may be and really is forgiven by them represented in Parliament to that purpose But this other Oath is made to such a part of His people Clero Anglicano and particularly taken by Him after His Oath to the whole Realme which were needlesse except it meant some other obligation This seemes to prove it a distinct Oath and not releasable without their consent Upon the same grounds that these Rights are pleaded voyd if Voted downe notwithstanding they to whom they belonged expresse not their will to part with them the strongest security England can give is weakned and discredited that is the ingagement of the Kingdome to repay such sums by consent of King and Lords and Commons which and which only is publique Faith In such a case can the City be Voted payd except they willingly release the debt if they should be told their rights are not stronger then lawes but these are made null at the desire of the Kingdome in Parliament they would soone apprehend their logique to be extreamely faultie and it is probable they would maintaine that the representative Kingdome in Parliament cannot dispense with the Kings obligation to a particular body of His Subjects in whom alone the power of releasement doth lye He is desired to nominate such Officers to manage the great affaires of state as they shall confide in that is to yeild up His undoubted right happily enjoyed by all His Royall Progenitors into their disposall and to determine His choice by arbitrary feares If they will confide in those whom the lawes doe not distrust the King hath satisfied even this request for he will not preferre any against whom they can bring just and legall exceptions But he thinks it no good argument to induce him to turne able honest Ministers who may challenge from His accustomed goodnesse that priviledge of quà m diu se bene gesserint meerly because others desire to have their places They themselves would conceive it very hard usage to be put out againe upon the same title when no legall exceptions were produced against them and therefore they presse His Majesty to secure them when once in by law and yet will not permit him to be ruled by their advice out of equity and to continue His favours to those men who by a faithfull discharge of their places have shewed themselves worthy of that trust if it will be reasonable then it is so now to encourage faithfull servants by making their owne offences only and not other mens feares the rule by which they shall suffer Nemo illis sic timere permisit They might as well tell the world in plaine english but that advantages are still made of the peoples blindnesse except the King will grant such preferments to us and our favorites for let Him nominate whom He will they will never confide unlesse He guide His nomination by their instructions who are to approve them and the truth is when they have gained one He hath reason to request them to take the other for they will save Him the trouble of naming in vaine and He may thereby conceale His hurtfull affection and not expose His best friends to dishonourable repulses except wee may be Patrons they would once have been contented to be onely the present incumbents and suffer Him to retaine the right to bestow them freely for the future time wee shall never indure peace and yet wee must be forced to cast the envy of so
betweene King and people and this violated by him dissolves the compact I have in this discourse punctually examined these and what farther grounds of scruples I could finde in the replyer as will appeare more fully in the following Section Being to answer so many I would not trespasse upon the Readers patience by an exact view of his particular mistakes which might have beene confuted with great ease but with no great advantage to the cause to which I have spoken more closely and as fully as I was able I will discover to him one desperate consequence from his principle which it concernes him to blush and repent for There is a mutuall Covenant betweene King and People and the breach of it dissolves the compact if so his Crowne is forfeited and he ceases to be King de jure upon such violation which he is now charged with because they could not have any colour for taking up Armes but upon this pretence Therefore the plaine conclusion is it is no want of duty in them though they depose him for it is no injury to take away what he can challenge no right to his claime was by vertue of compact which is dissolved by his not standing to conditions and so the bargaine is unmade the bonds of allegiance are broken asunder The Houses have laboured to cleare themselves from this wicked doctrine by telling us the deposition of the second Edward and Richard was not to be numbered amongst the presidents of Parliament and that no free Parliament ever attempted the like and yet a private man dares publish such manifest Treason I am perswaded that the Author supposing a breach of covenant of His Majesties part and then telling us such a breach dissolves the compact was not fully apprehensive that this pernitious principle unkings his Soveraigne When he sees his treasonable errour he will finde that Logick ill managed is a more dangerous weapon then a sword in the hands of mad men To returne to further proofes of the Kings supremacy Kings supremacy further proved That which makes a State one is the union of supreame power and this according as it is placed in one or more persons gives denomination to the forme so that all those Acts of Parliament which confesse this a Monarchy are so many solid testimonies of the Kings supremacy The Answer is Though this be demonstrably true in an absolute Empire yet it concludes not in a mixt Monarchy I am very confident a mistake of this mixt Monarchy hath engaged many well-meaning men against the King to the overthrow of our Lawes which the simpler part are perswaded they fight for Honestâ voluntate rebelles sunt there are some who contribute their forces to destroy this Kingdome in behalfe of the Common-wealth The true meaning of that which is called a mixt Monarchy and they are so farre deceived as to be made unhappy instruments to advance private interests with publique hearts And therefore it will be necessary to discover their errour by which their unfortunate Country hath suffer'd as much as by the saults of others They have not any shadow of excuse to countenance their Rebellion from this distinction unlesse mixt Monarchy doe signifie either that the people in their diffusive body or by their representatives have a greater or at least an equall power with the King The reason of which is because inferiours by the acknowledgement of all have not any jurisdiction over superiours and equalls though they have not imperium right to governe yet if injur'd and they require satisfaction and upon denyall of it attempt to compasse it by force they are esteemed by the Law of Reason and Nations just enemies whereas Subjects if they make warre upon their Soveraigne though when wronged are worthily accompted Rebels First the diffusive body of the people hath not greater nay not equall power with the King because they have not any legall way of expressing themselves Our Lawes determine it Treason to enter into any association or raise a Warre without the Kings consent and much more against his expresse commands Secondly the representative body hath not greater nor equall power with the King The same argument overthrowes their claime for the people cannot authorize them to doe beyond what themselves were enabled to therefore if actions of this nature were unwarrantable in the diffusive body they are so in the representative Representative Body is not the People to all purposes It may be not unfit to observe that the representative body is the people onely to some ends and purposes whereto they were intrusted by them according to Law and therefore no illegall ordinances such as all those are which the King denyes to ratifie ought to be called the Acts of the people They are no more concerned in it then if they should take upon them contrary to Law to stampe and coyne money with the inscription of Senatis populúsque Anglicanus or to send Ambassadors or denounce warre against or enter into a League of friendship with forreigne Princes or bestow the great offices of State or dispose of Wardships or take to themselves a power to raise Armes without His Majesties consent Againe because they represent the people but to some purposes onely though their principles were firme as they are extreamely weake that the King is lesse then His Subjects conjunctim and that they collectively are more honourable then He c. yet they bring not the conclusion home to the two Houses Because it doth not appeare and they had no reason to take it for granted that the two Houses which they call the Parliament are the people in this consideration A Jury is the representative people as experience teaches and we may finde it in Sir Thomas Smith l. 2. c. 26. The legall answer to that interrogatory How will you be tryed is Dei populique judicio by God and my Country and the Clerke of the Sizes replyes Ecce tibi hi probi viri populum repraesentant and the Sophistry would be easily discovered if we should argue they are therefore more honourable then the King We may take notice also that their arguments are onely capable of concluding for the House of Commons and if they follow the necessary consequences of them they must maintaine the Lower is above the Upper House for the Lords sit onely in personall capacities being inabled thereto by the prudence of our Lawes which thought it reasonable they should have as great a share in the government as a negative voyce came to because they injoyed such ample revenues that they were likely not to agree to any thing prejudiciall to the present setled State I shall prove more fully in the next Section that those who represent Subjects and that but to some purposes and not the King to any for this would overthrow that fundamentall constitution of three distinct Estates cannot be equall to much lesse above their Soveraigne And that groundlesse invention which denyes subordination and introduces
an unheard of co-ordination such as creates Regnum in Regno and rents this Country into distinct Kingdomes shall be refuted Since what is called mixt Monarchy cannot give such a right as is pleaded for that Subjects should be free to wage warre against their Prince because this liberty makes two independent States which are not compatible in one body but would be as really distinct Kingdomes in England as Spaine and France are I will endeavour to declare the true meaning thereof If we speake properly there cannot be such a thing as mixtum Imperium a mixt Monarchy or mixt Aristocracy or mixt Democracy Because if there are divers supreame powers it is no longer one State If the supreame power be but one that is that authority unto which Le dernier ressort de la justice the last appeale must be made and against whose sentence though unjust we have not any legall remedy this must be placed either in one man who is the fountaine of all jurisdiction and then it is a Monarchicall government or in some Nobles and then the Regiment is Aristocraticall and the sentence of the major part of them becomes Law to all effects whether concerning our goods or lives or if the civill constitutions of a State direct us to appeale to the people this is an absolute and true Democracy By a mixt Monarchy therefore not to quarrell about words nothing but this can reasonably be understood that it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein the will of the Prince publiquely made knowne gives the Law Quodcunque Principi placet legis habet vigorem but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a government not arbitrary but restrained by positive constitutions wherein a Prince hath limited himselfe by promise or oath not to exercise full power This grant is of force because any man may either totally resigne or diminish his rights by Covenant Hence it is that in Monarchies all Kings have supreame power though they have not all the same jura Regalia their prerogatives are larger or narrower according to their particular grants For example our Kings have retained to themselves the rights of coyning money making great officers bestowing honours as Dukedomes Baronies Knighthoods c. pardoning all offences against the Crowne making warre and peace sending Ambassadors to negotiate with forraigne States c. and they have restrained themselves from the use of that power which makes new Lawes and repeales old without the consent of the Lords and Commons in Parliament as likewise from raising money upon the Subject without their consent Some doe aske How are we the better if we must suffer him to breake this Covenant as oft as he pleases it is the same thing not to have any Lawes and not to have provision for the observance of them First Difference betweene arbitrary rule and government restrained by Law notwithstanding hostile resistance unlawfull though in case of violation I must tell you this objection is answered by shewing there is a necessity that some body must be trusted It is no discretion to prevent a possible mischiefe by probable inconveniences if you will not trust one you must trust more that is if you are weary of Monarchy under which your fore-fathers enjoyed happy times and experience cannot cozen you though arguments may you know the way to cast it off by placing so many guardians over your Prince but have you any greater assurance then before Quis custodiet ipsos custodes They have as great temptations to faile their trust as he had and it is likely being warned by such a president of deserting your naturall Prince they may feare your inconstancy and upon pretence that you are subject to mistake and because they suspect you may be willing they will take such order you shall not be able to call them to an accompt But suppose this may not be and that those who suppresse Tyrants or perhaps excellent Kings under that name may not be frighted with their owne example to make use of their present power to exercise a greater tyranny for it is not impossible they should grow jealous too and tell you plainly they have no reason to trust you If you deny them money here is ground of diffidence your designe is to expose them to poverty so to contempt so to ruine But suppose I say nothing of this but that they will be secure amidst your jealousies which manifestly endanger their safety yet you will be forced at last to trust the giddy multitude who are alwayes weary of the present government because there are still some unavoidable defects and these are discerned by sense and they have not such depth of understanding as to foresee greater mischiefes which can onely be judged of by reason and therefore are easily perswaded to attempt a change so that your peace is built upon a very weake foundation you have no better security against a civill warre then that the greater part of the people will be discreet If things prosper not according to their wishes crafty men perswade them the fault lyes in those who have the managery of the publique and if these be not removed and honest and wise men meaning themselves put in their places their miseries will daily grow upon them A generall accusation of ill affected malignant persons wicked Counsellors is cause sufficient to out their supposed enemies of all preferments and put their pretended friends in their roomes This opens a gap to all confusion civill warre and most unnaturall distractions are the certaine issue of it Our owne lamentable experience confirmes this sad truth After you had obtained a perfect confirmation of all your ancient rights and liberties with a gracious enlargement of them by new grants and with such security as your fore-fathers were not acquainted with you are frighted with the possibility of a relapse To prevent which it was thought fit to take away the Kings power with which our Lawes had invested him as the necessary meanes for our protection because it was not impossible he might use it for our oppression Accordingly the Kings Navy His Forts Magazines and the Armes of the Kingdome are put into such as you would call safe hands I doe not aske with what conscience but with what judgement you did this The want of prudence was as great as that of honesty what hath beene the successe of confiding in those whom the Lawes had not intrusted are not your sufferings infinitely multiplyed are you not extreamely sicke of your remedy The tables are quite turned and your friends have undertaken the same bad game and play it much worse you onely make the stakes and are in a probable way to loose all that you have What one thing did you complaine of which is not exceeded by them your grievances are highly improved Magna Charta and the Petition of Right are now malignant they speake not the sense of the House but take part with the King To quote our
the crosse of our Saviour by taking up carnall weapons I wish from my soule all such as pretend to the Reformed Protestant Religion had beene unblamable in this respect and that they had rather chosen to manifest their christian then their martiall spirit Wherever armes have beene lifted up against their lawfull Magistrates though they were unjustly afflicted for the testimony of a good conscience I cannot excuse them from resisting the ordinance of God who would have beene glorified in their martyrdome I am sorry to meet with objections drawne from the unwarrantable practise of some which doe not conclude you innocent but that others were likewise faulty I am certaine the primitive Christians were better catechised and wee read the same doctrine of true patience in their lives as in their schooles which taught them to take up Christs crosse and to follow him in that yoak in which he drew They fought not against their Arrian Emperours in defence of the Nicene Creed no rebellion was undertaken by them under colour of preventing their consciences from being forced which is indeed an impossible thing we may be robbed of our goods we cannot be plundered of our religion Did not Christianity thrive upon persecutions Sanguis martyrum semen ecclesiae The bloud of the Saints made their surviving brethren fruitfull in good workes Their patience wearied the cruelty of their adversaries and gained innumerable converts who began to suspect christianity was true when they saw it so powerfull as to make the professors live with so much innocence and dye with so great meekenesse and to neglect all earthly interests in expectation of Heaven Exc. Though private men should not yet Inferior Magistrates may force him who hath the Supreame power to rule according to justice and the established Lawes Answ The same reason which disables private men from righting themselves concludes likewise against inferior Magistrates that is want of Jurisdiction For if opposed to him whose authority only can alter the nature of revenge and make it justice for inferior in superiorem non habet imperium they are but private persons It is an unreasonable impossible thing that men should be obliged to obey two Masters commanding contrary duties because this would impose upon them a necessity of sinning which must be layd upon him who was the author of that necessity And therefore God hath appointed a convenient subordination in all authorities Vt sol delet minora sydera as the lesser lights are extinguisht by the greatest Luminary the fountaine of all light so minor jurisdictions must give place to him who is the fountaine of justice If God command one thing the King another wee must be obedient to divine ordinance because wee cannot be subject to mans command for conscience sake against him who hath the sole authority to oblige conscience So if the King command one thing and his Ministers inferior Magistrates another wee must submit to regall power either by obeying or suffering because they can challenge our obedience onely by virtue of his authority and this cannot be set up in an hostile way against his person Whether it be reasonable to obey the Kings Officers who can doe nothing but in his name against the King judge yee Souldiers are bound to execute the commands of their Captaine yet not if they are contradicted by their Colonell and he must not be obeyed against an expresse order from the Generall In thus doing St Augustine and reason also assure us wee despise not the power but choose to submit to the higher lesser Magistrates have no just grounds of complaint if we preferre the supreme for in reference to the highest their magistracy ceases and they become our fellow Subjects Let every soule be subject to the higher powers saith Saint Paul We must obey the King and His Officers also as they represent the King for quod per officiarios facit per se facere videtur and they must be obedient as well as wee as they represent Subjects Thus Nehemiah receiving commission from Artaxerxes armed his countrey-men against those who governed under the King Saint Peter very appositely differences this duty in respect of King and Magistrates Submit your selves unto the King as Supreme but unto Governours as unto them that are sent by him and derive their power from him and are His Ministers to execute His commands 1 Pet. 2. 13 14. Exc. It is objected but very impertinently if a King command against established Lawes and inferior Magistrates according to the Law they ought to be obeyed Answ This comes not home to the case I grant obedience to the Kings command against law is unwarrantable but this doth not conclude the lawfulnesse of hostile resistance Wee doe our duty in submitting to His legall will though against his Letters or words of mouth for he hath obliged us so to doe and by his owne grant hath restrained his right to recall and abrogate Lawes except by advice and consent of both Houses in Parliament If He be offended without cause we are bound by christian and civill constitutions to submit though to His unjust wrath If they meane to conclude their owne innocence they must frame their Argument thus If a King command against Law and Magistrates resist according to Law wee may without guilt take part with them This is true if they resist according to Law but this cannot be in a Monarchy for if the Lawes grant a right of resistance in any case when that case comes the Monarchy is dissolved for those who are enabled to take up armes against Him are His equalls or colleagues at least the union is destroyed and they are not to be esteemed Rebels then but just enemies because they cease to be Subjects They cannot vindicate themselves from Treason and Rebellion except they can produce some Law of England which dispenses with their Alleagiance in such cases and shew that our civill constitutions are so framed as to make Bellum Civile Bellum utrinque justum a Civill Warre a just Warre of both sides in the law notion which cannot be except there be two supreme authorities to proclaime and manage it That this is not so the Houses shall give testimony against themselves for they acknowledge themselves in their addresses to His Majesty His humble and loyall Subjects assembled in Parliament Exc. Another maine exception and which they most triumph in is this I will deliver the words of one of them who hath expressed it the most fully As it is a Parliament it is the highest Court of Justice in the Kingdome therefore hath power to send for by force those that are accused before them that they may come to their triall which if I mistake not power inferior Courts have much more the highest 'T is out of doubt agreed on by all that the Parliament hath a power to send a Serjeant at Armes to bring up such an one as is accused before them and if they have power to send one Serjeant at
good and ancient Lawes is interpreted a breach of Priviledges of Parliament appeales are made to the people the ready way to a universall confusion And they according to private information and mis-guided affections did once passe this sentence that to imprison without cause alleadged and to deny Habeas corpus's is no intrenchment upon the liberty of the Subject to bestow mens estates by whole sale and take away their Money Plate or Goods doth not destroy the property of the Subject To scorne and revile the Booke of Common Prayer against an Act of Parliament which severely punishes such contempt and to supplant our established doctrine and discipline by countenancing Anabaptisme and Brownisme conduces to the holy Reformation and will in time effect that great worke and settle true Religion Thus much by the way to shew that we cannot have any absolute security in all governments it is necessary to trust some body For if we should retaine a liberty to right our selves not to mention the fatall mischiefes of Anarchy and that it is probable this freedome would be frequently abused to our wrong selfe-love making men partiall in their owne causes the decision of controversies would be writ in bloud and we should lay a fruitfull seed-plot of civill warres contrary to the end of society which is to preserve publique peace though sometimes with private losse because though we suffer some things by injustice yet we enjoy great benefits by common tranquillity but in the ruine of the whole the rights of single persons must be destroyed The hazard likewise appeares much greater by inabling those to injure us whom the Law hath not intrusted with our protection To answer their objection fully who would perswade the people there is not any differnce betweene arbitrary government and government restrained by lawes if Subjects may not compell their soveraigne to the observation of them Greater security would undoe us For though wee suffer sometimes under reall greivances yet pretended breaches of our rights which can never be wanting as long as ambitious persons are discontented would have the same influence to stirre up civill dissentions and it is a more prudent course to oblige some to sit downe though wronged then to open a certaine way for Schisme in the body by indulging a most pernicious freedome of righting themselves It was wisely said by Seneca satius est a paucis etiam justam excusationem non accipi quà m ab omnibus aliquam tentari For Kingdomes are many times disturbed upon meere pretences There are such who will set their country on fire only to warme their owne hands by it and trouble the waters that they may the better catch fish that is who will pursue private interests with hazard of publicke destruction He that doubts this let him consult histories and he shall find it hath beene fatall to the best Princes to have the worst Subjects I appeale to mens consciences whether they have not read and perhaps scene the reigne of a most gracious Prince a Prince eminently mercifull and just branded with the odious name of Tyranny And when malice it selfe cannot blemish his actions when he is not so bad as they could pray for for they would have made great advantages if they could charge him with personall vices as unchast intemperate or negligent in performance of religious duties yet craft hath done their businesse and abused the peoples weaknesse so farr as to make them active in their owne ruine by that wicked Art of declaming against evill counsellours Of such dangerous consequence is it to open a way to civill warre upon pretended miscarriages in government But grant not fancyed but reall injuries Yet non tanti est civilia bella moveri It is true the people are then not so happy as they might be but to make use of force as a remedy will encrease their miseries It is certaine this Kingdome never suffered so highly under the greatest tyrant as it hath already by this unnaturall warre and who can tell whither it may not end in a universall destruction If a King be forced to conquer against his will who knows how farre he may be tempted beyond his naturall disposition It is a melancholly consideration that a peoples perversenesse may change a gentle Scepter into a rod of iron But if Subjects prevaile we can see no end of the warre Forraigne nations will be powred upon this unhappy land there will never be wanting at home a considerable party as long as there are either honest or discontented men to fight for the regaining his haereditary rights to keepe whom in awe our fellow Subjects will plead a necessity of being tyrants I could wish it were not already acted upon us first their will made necessity and then necessity makes their will the measure of right and wrong and destroyes all law their wants will give law to us and imprison us upon bare suspicion of Loyalty and seize on our estates for feare they may be honestly imployed Thus we see a necessity of trust and that we are bound not only in conscience but in prudence also not to revenge the not performance of it I can further make it appeare we have very good security as strong as humane wisedome ever invented that we shall live happily and therefore we have no reason to robbe our selves of those great blessings which we lately injoyed peace and plenty upon vaine feares and groundlesse jealousies of imaginary miseries Our forefathers did not distrust the sound temper of this policy and they injoyed the benefits of it in a high degree First the King hath sworne to preserve our Lawes our Liberties our Propriety and our Religion and he desires God so to prosper him and his as he performes this Oath unto the Lord who will require a severe accompt Wee may make a highly probable conjecture of the sincerity of his royall heart and the unfeignednesse of his many sacred Protestations from his miraculous successe If God had not fought on his side if the immediate hand of providence had not supported him in mans judgment he had beene swallowed up Secondly if he should command any illegall things the executioners of them are responsable and must make satisfaction to the injur'd parties And they cannot flatter themselves with hopes of impunitie for once in three yeares a Parliament will call them to accompt and they have a great Democraticall advantage for the obtaining justice Because the Kings wants cannot be supplyed without their consent and it is very unlikely he will deny any reasonable petitions or reject any desires but such as robbe him of his honour which is infinitely deare to him above plenty except they endeavour to make him worse then poore which cannot be by demanding justice it is most probable he will readily assent Thirdly His interests are the same with the Subjects They are not like two buckets when one is lowest the other is highest but they resemble the Head and rest of the