Tracts on Liberty by the Levellers and their Critics Vol. 8 Addendum (1638–1646)

1st Edition, uncorrected (Date added: August 4, 2015)

This volume is part of a set of 7 volumes of Leveller Tracts: Tracts on Liberty by the Levellers and their Critics (1638-1659), 7 vols. Edited by David M. Hart and Ross Kenyon (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2014). </titles/2595>.

It is an uncorrected HTML version which has been put online as a temporary measure until all the corrections have been made to the XML files which can be found [here](/titles/2595). The collection will contain over 250 pamphlets.

To date, the following volumes have been corrected:

Further information about the collection can be found here:

2nd Revised Edition

A second revised edition of the collection is planned after the conversion of the texts has been completed. It will include an image of the title page of the original pamphlet, its location, date, and id number in the Thomason Collection catalog, a brief bio of the author, and a brief description of the contents of the pamphlet. Also, the titles from the addendum volumes will be merged into their relevant volumes by date of publication.

Tracts on Liberty by the Levellers and their Critics, Volume 8 Addendum to (1638–1646)

The Liberty of the Freeborne Englishman (John Lilburne in Gaol)

 

The Liberty of the Freeborne English-Man, Conferred on him by the house of lords. June 1646. John Lilburne. His age 23. Year 1641. Made by G. Glo.

“Gaze not upon this shaddow that is vaine,
Bur rather raise thy thoughts a higher straine,
To GOD (I meane) who set this young-man free,
And in like straits can eke thee.
Yea though the lords have him in bonds againe
LORD of lords will his just cause maintaine.”

 

Table of Contents

 

Editor’s Introduction

This collection of pamphlets and tracts is a supplement to earlier volumes in this series which were discovered during the course of their preparation. Publishing information about each title can be found in the catalog of the George Thomason collection (henceforth “TT” for Thomason Tracts):

Catalogue of the Pamphlets, Books, Newspapers, and Manuscripts relating to the Civil War, the Commonwealth, and Restoration, collected by George Thomason, 1640–1661. 2 vols. (London: William Cowper and Sons, 1908).

  • Vol. 1. Catalogue of the Collection, 1640–1652
  • Vol. 2. Catalogue of the Collection, 1653–1661. Newspapers. Index.

Biographical information about the authors can be found in the Biographical Dictionary of British Radicals in the Seventeenth Century, ed. Richard L. Greaves and Robert Zeller (Brighton, Sussex: The Harvester Press, 1982–84), 3 vols.

  • Volume I: A-F
  • Volume II: G-O
  • Volume III: P-Z

8.1. John Selden, A Brief Discourse concerning the Power of the Peeres (1640)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Selden, A Briefe Discourse, concerning the Power of the Peeres, and Commons of Parliament, in point of Judicature. Written by a learned Antiquerie, at the request of a Peere, of this Realme. Printed in the yeere, 1640.

Estimated date of publication

1640 (no month given).

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

Not listed in TT.

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

SIR, to give you as short an account of your desires as I can, I must crave leave to lay you as a ground, the frame or first modell of this state.

When after the period of the Saxon time, Harold had lifted himselfe into the Royall Seat; the Great men, to whom but lately hee was no more then equall either in fortune or power, disdaining this Act, of arrogancy, called in William then Duke of Normandy, a Prince more active then any in these Westerne parts, and renowned for many victories he had fortunately archieved against the French King, then the most potent Monarch in Europe.

This Duke led along with him to this worke of glory, many of the younger sons of the best families of Normandy, Picardy and Flanders, who as undertakers, accompanied the undertaking of this fortunate man.

The Usurper slaine, and the Crowne by warre gained, to secure certaine to his posterity, what he had so suddenly gotten, he shared out his purchase retaining in each County a portion to support the Dignity Soveraigne, which was stiled Demenia Regni; now the ancient Demeanes, and assigning to others his adventurers such portions as suited to their quality and expence, retaining to himselfe dependancy of their personall seruice, except such Lands as in free Almes were the portion of the Church, these were stiled Barones Regis, the Kings immediate Freeholders, for the word Baro imported then no more.

As the King to these, so these to their followers subdivided part of their shares into Knights fees, and their Tennants were called Barones Comites, or the like; for we finde, as in the Kings Writ in their Writs Baronibus suis & Francois & Anglois, the soveraigne gifts, for the most part extending to whole Counties or Hundreds, an Earle being Lord of the one, and a Baron of the inferiour donations to Lords of Towne-ships or Mannors.

As thus the Land, so was all course of Judicature divided even from the meanest to the highest portion, each severall had his Court of Law, preserving still the Mannor of our Ancestours the Saxons, who jura per pages reddebant; and these are still tearmed Court-Barons, or the Freeholders Court, twelue usually in number, who with the Thame or chiefe Lord were Judges.

The Hundred was next, where the Hundredus or Aldermanus Lord of the Hundred, with the cheife Lord of each Townshippe within their lymits judged; Gods people observed this forme in the publike Centureonis & decam Judicabant plebem omni tempore.

The County or Generale placitum was the next, this was so to supply the defect, or remedy the corruption of the inferior, Vbi Curiæ Dominorum probantur defecisse, pertinet ad vice comitem Provinciarum; the Iudges here were Comites, vice comites & Barones Comitatus qui liberas in hoterras habeant.

The last & supreme, & proper to our questio, was generale placitum aupud London universalis Synodus in Charters of the Conquerour, Capitalis curia by Glanvile, Magnum & Commune consilium coram Rege et magnatibus snis.

In the Rolles of Henry the 3. It is not stative, but summoned by Proclamation, Edicitur generale placitum apud London, saith the Booke of Abingdon, whether Epium Duces principes, Satrapæ Rectores, & Causidici ex omni parte confluxerunt ad istam curiam, saith Glanvile: Causes were referred, Propter aliquam dubitationem quæ Emergit in comitatu, cum Comitatus nescit dijudicare. Thus did Ethelweld Bishop of Winchester transferre his suit against Leostine, from the County ad generale placitum, in the time of King Etheldred, Queene Edgine against Goda; from the County appealed to King Etheldred at London. Congregatis principibus & sapaientibus Angliæ, a suit between the Bishops of Winchester and Durham in the time of Saint Edward. Coram Episcopis & principibus Regni in presentia Regis ventilate & finita. In the tenth yeere of the Conquerour, Episcopi, Comites & Barones Regni potestate adversis provinciis ad universalem Synodum pro causis audiendis & tractandis Convocati, saith the Book of Westminster. And this continued all along in the succeeding Kings raigne, untill towards the end of Henry the third.

AS this great Court or Councell consisting of the King and Barons, ruled the great affaires of State and controlled all inferiour Courts, so were there certaine Officers, whose transcendent power seemed to bee set to bound in the execution of Princes wills, as the Steward, Constable, and Marshall fixed upon Families in fee for many ages: They as Tribunes of the people, or ex plori among the Athenians, growne by unmanly courage fearefull to Monarchy, fell at the feete and mercy of the King, when the daring Earle of Leicester was slaine at Evesham.

This chance and the deare experience Hen. the 3. himselfe had made at the Parliament at Oxford in the 40. yeare of his raigne, and the memory of the many straights his Father was driven unto, especially at Rumny-mead neare Stanes, brought this King wisely to beginne what his successour fortunately finished, in lessoning the strength and power of his great Lords; and this was wrought by searching into the Regality they had usurped over their peculiar Soveraignes, wherby they were (as the Booke of Saint Albans termeth them.) Quot Dominum tot Tiranni.) and by the weakning that hand of power which they carried in the Parliaments by commanding the service of many Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses to that great Councell.

Now began the frequent sending of Writs to the Commons, their assent not onely used in money, charge, and making Lawes, for before all ordinances passed by the King and Peeres, but their consent in judgements of all natures whether civill or criminall: In proofe whereof I will produce some few succeeding Presidents out of Record.

Liber S. Alban, so. 20. &illegible; An. 44. H. 3.When Adamor that proud Prelate of Winchester the Kings halfe brother had grieved the State by his daring power, he was exiled by joynt sentence of the King, the Lords & Commons, and this appeareth expressely by the Letter sent to Pope Alexander the fourth, expostulating a revocation of him from banishment, because he was a Church-man, and so not subject to any censure, in this the answer is, Si Dominus Rex & Regni majores hoc vellent, meaning his revocation, Communitas tamen ipsius ingressũ in Angliã iam nullatemus sustineret. The Peeres subsigne this Answer with their names and Petrus de Mountford vice totius Communitatis, as speaker or proctor of the cõmons.

Charta orig. sub sigil. An. &illegible; H. &illegible;For by that stile Sir John Tiptofe, Prolocutor, affirmeth under his Armes the Deed of Intaile of the Crowne by King Henry the 4. in the 8. year of his raigne for all the Commons.

The banishment of the two Spencers in the 15. of Edward the second, Prelati Comites & Barones et les autres Peeres de la terre & Communes de Roialme give consent and sentence to the revocation and reversement of the former sentence the Lords and Commons accord, and so it is expressed in the Roll.

In the first of Edw. the 3.Rot. Parl. &illegible; E. 3. vel. &illegible; when Elizabeth the widdow of Sir John de Burgo complained in Parliament, that Hugh Spencer the yonger, Robert Boldock and William Cliffe his instruments had by duresse forced her to make a Writing to the King, whereby shee was despoiled of all her inheritance, sentence is given for her in these words, Pur ceo que avis est al Evesques Counts & Barones & autres grandes & a tout Cominalte de la terre, que le dit escript est fait contre ley, & tout manere de raison si fuist le dit escript per agard del Parliam. dampue elloques al livre a la dit Eliz.

In An. 4. Edw. 3.Prelationrs Parliam. 1. Ed. 3. Rot. 11. it appeareth by a Letter to the Pope, that to the sentence given against the Earle of Kent, the Commons were parties aswell as well as the Lords & Peeres, for the King directed their proceedings in these words, Comitibus, Magnatibus, Baronibus, & aliis de Communitate dicti Regni ad Parliamentum illud congregatis injunximus ut super his discernerent & judicarent quod rationi et justitiæ, conveniret, habere præ oculis, solum Deum qui eum concordi unanimi sententia tanquam reum criminis læsœ majestatis morti adjudicarent ejus sententia, &c.

&illegible; Ann. 5. &illegible;When in the 50. yeere of Ed. 3. the Lords had pronounced the sentence against Richard Lions, otherwise then the Commons agreed they appealed to the King, and had redresse, and the sentence entred to their desires.

&illegible; Ann 1. &illegible; 11. 3. &illegible;When in the first yeere of Richard the second, William Weston and John Jennings were arraigned in Parliament for surrendring certaine Forts of the Kings, the Commons were parties to the sentence against them given, as appeareth by a Memorandum ãnexed to that Record. In the first of Hen. the 4, although the Commons referre by protestation, the pronouncing of the sentence of deposition against King Rich. the 2. unto the Lords, yet are they equally interessed in it, as it appeareth by the Record, for there are made Proctors or Commissioners for the whole Parliament, one B. one Abbot, one E. one Baron, & 2. Knights, Gray and Erpingham for the Commons, and to inferre that because the Lords pronounced the sentence, the point of judgement should be onely theirs, were as absurd as to conclude, that no authority was best in any other Commissioner of Oyer and Terminer then in the person of that man solely that speaketh the sentence.

The following marginalia text is unreadable and Liberty Fund has made no effort to partially transcribe it.In 2. Hen. 5. the Petition of the Commons importeth no lesse then a right they had to act and assent to all things in Parliament, and so it is answered by the King; and had not the adjournall Roll of the higher house beene left to the sole entry of the Clarke of the upper House, who, either out of the neglect to observe due forme, or out of purpose to obscure the Commons right & to flatter the power of those he immediately served, there would have bin frequent examples of al times to cleer this doubt, and to preserve a just interest to the Cõmon-wealth, and how conveniently it suites with Monarchy to maintaine this forme, left others of that well framed body knit under one head, should swell too great and monstrous. It may be easily thought for; Monarchy againe may sooner groane under the weight of an Aristocracie as it once did, then under Democracie which it never yet either felt or fear’d.

FINIS.

 


8.2. John Davies, An Answer to those Printed Papers by the late Patentees of Salt (1641)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

An Answer To Those Printed Papers published in March last, 1640. by the late Patentees of Salt, in their pretended defence, and against free trade.
Composed by IOHN DAVIES Citizen and Fishmonger of London, a well-wisher to the Common-wealth in generall.

Sal sapit omnia. Ne scis quid valeat.
Printed in the yeare, 1641.

Estimated date of publication

1641 (no month given).

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

Not listed in TT.

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

THe ensuing Treatise, concerning the opposing of the project and Patents for Salt, tending to the good of his Majesty, and of the Subjects in generall, (wherein all faithfull endeavours on the Authours part are performed) is most humbly presented, praying, that if any error is therein committed, (whereof he is not conscious) may by this Honourable Assembly be pardoned.

An Answer to those Papers (falsly intituled, A true Remonstrance of the state of the Salt businesse, &c.) lutely published in print in March. 1640. by the Projectors of the first and second Patents for Salt, in their owne pretended defence, and against the free trade of all Merchants, Navigators, and Traders for Fish and Salt of the City of London, and all other Ports, and of all Salt makers and Salt refiners, and of all other his Majestces Subjects within the extent of their severall Patents betweene Barwicke and Weymouth, as followeth.

IN this Answer it will not be necessary to bee limited within the strict time where the Projectors began which was in Anno 1627. thereby to serve their own occasions, but is intended to declare the truth of the most usuall and constant prices of Salt at the City of London; as, it hath beene sold for 40. yeares last past, as in the sequell shall appeare.

That in Anno 1600. even till the latter part of the yeare, 1627. the most usuall price either of white or bay Salt, was neare about 50. s. or 3. l. a Wey, and often sold under that price, as can be sufficiently proved.

That in the said yeare 1627. the Watres began betweene the Kings Majesty of Great Britaine, and the French King, and the King of Spaine; in which time, till the peace was concluded betwixt those Kings, the commoditie of Salt was very deare and scarce, especially French Salt, which was at 6. s. or 7. s. a bushell at the City of London, which came to passe in regard the Salt-workes in France were destroyed.

First, at the Ile of Ree by the Duke of Buckinghams designe.

Secondly, by the French King himselfe in the warres when he tooke in Rochel.

And thirdly, by intemperate Raine which fell that time in France. So that the Kingdome of France it selfe, which was wont to supply many other parts, as England, Ireland, Holland, the Eastland, and Germany, was thereby necessitated with want of that commodity for its owne occasion. And therefore not to be admired, that the French King made an Edict in Anno 1630. that no Salt should bee exported out of his Kingdome, (untill his store should bee supplyed againe.) Which scarcity in France for that present, forced all men to send into Spaine for Salt, and thereupon a great number of Ships from all parts arriving there at one time, gave the King of Spaine occasion to make use of the present necessity, and layd a great Impost on the Salt that should bee transported from thence.

The very same cause also moved the Kings Majesty of Great Britaine, and the Lords of the Councell, to order in that time of scarcity of Salt, by meanes of a Petition exhibited to the Lords by the Lord Maior of the City of London, and divers other Ports in Anno 1630. that no Salt should be transported into any forraigne parts, which was effectually granted them by the Lords. But when in one or two yeares after, and that in France there were erected Salt-workers, and Salt was made plentifully againe, as in the yeare 1632. then by the Edicts of the said Kings, the great imposition of Salt in Spaine and France ceased, and Salt became cheape againe, and Trade free as in former yeares, as about 3. l. or 3. li. 10. s. per Wey, for English or French, and 4. l. per Wey for Spanish Salt at most, which continued till December, 1634.

So that the cause of the dearth of Salt in France, Anno 1628. till Anno 1632. hapned through Warre and intemperate Weather, as before is specified, and not by the pleasure of Princes, by laying of a great Impost upon it, as they the Patentees falsly pretended; but the Projectors were desirous to make that an occasion of bringing their covetous desires to effect, and about that time they beganne to devise to bring an Impost on the English native Salt, which was and is dearer to the makers of it then any other salt spent in this Kingdome. For French and Spanish Salt being made onely by the heat of the Sunne, stands not the makers of it in above 10. s. or 20. s. or 30. s. a London Wey at the most, according to the drinesse, or the wetnesse of the Summer, whereas the English Shields Salt at 1. d. per Gallon, (which is the cheap price the Patentees boast of stands the makers of it in 53. s. 4. s. the like Wey at least, being also the weakest Salt of all other by one third part, and therefore cannot be are any Impost, without destroying the English manufactures, as these Projectors have all this time practised, to the destruction thereof, although they pretended the contrary.

It is to be observed, that a Wey of Salt at the City of London, containeth 40. Bushels, and every Bushell 10. Gallons, which is the right measure according to the Statute; from which, in most other Ports it much differeth.

That in December, 1634. the first Projectors, consisting of twenty two in number, (whereof five were Knights, the other seventeene had the titles of Esquires and Gentlemen) having determined and practised formerly to doe mischiefe in this Land wherein they were borne and bred, and being all or most of them unexperienced in the matter they tooke in hand, devised and obtained this Monopoly of Salt, mis-informing his Majesty, and the Lords of the Councell, that it would be a great benefit to this Kingdome of England, and that of Scotland, to erect workes for the making a sufficient quantity of Salt, &c. and at a certaine moderate price, (as they so termed it) not exceeding 3. l. a Shields Wey, which is after the rate of 5. l. 12. s. for a Wey delivered at London, which is an intolerable exaction upon a native manufacture, made and spent in this Kingdome, as by their Patent more fully doth appeare; (although the Salt pannes in those places were erected long before, and not by these Patentees.) Which Patent being obtained by them, they practised to oppresse the Subject from January 1635. untill August 1638. all which time the first Patentees having made a Monopoly, in taking all the old Workes and Pannes at the Shields into their hands, forced white Salt at the City of London to the price of 4. l. 15. s. per Wey, and for the most part to 5. l. per Wey, and so in all other Ports according to that rate.

And Bay Salt by reason of their great Impost of 48. s. 6. d. per Wey, which was raised by a privy Seale, procured by Edward Nattall, and others his associates, (but nothing brought to accompt for his Majesty, as yet appears) was not all that time sold at London under 5. l. 10. s. per Wey, at least, but commonly at 5. l. 13. s. 4. d. per Wey, or 6. l. whereas the Westerne parts, which were free of their Patent, as Southampton, Exeter, Plimouth, Bristol, &c. had it in that time at or about 3. l. the like Wey, and sometimes under that price, which was most unjust and unequall, that the Easterne parts should suffer so much thereby, not onely in the price, but also in hindrance of Navigation, and losse of Trade.

That about July, 1638. the first Patentees having difference with Master Murford of Yarmouth, who had a Patent granted before theirs at Shields, prevailed against them, and some of them of the first Patent being wearied with the designe, voluntarily laid downe their Patent.

That after the first Patentees gave over their Patent, the Salt-makers at Shields in August, 1638. reassumed their Pannes, and sold Salt there cheape againe, and thereby both Scottish and Shields Salt was sold at London for 3. l. per Wey, or near thereabout, untill January following, that Thomas Horth and his associates obtained a grant of their Patent, which they presently after put in execution, yet Horth and his associates of the second Patent had no time to raise the price of white Salt at Shields to that height as they desired, for the Scots presently after the first Pacification in August, 1639. brought it downe at London to 2. l. 17. s. per Wey, whereas Horth and his Associates in June and July 1639. would sell none at London under 4. l. 10. s. per Wey.

That whereas the first and second Projectors of both Patents, to cleare themselves of the great wrong done by them to his Majesty and his Subjects, doe in their printed Papers lay the blame on the traders in Salt of the City of London, seeking therby to glosse over their oppressing the Subjects even in the face of this Honourable Parliament, still pretending as formerly, that what they did was for his Majesties profit, benefit of Navigation, support of home manufacture, and generall good of the subject, and many such like things, all which pretences are meere falshoods and suggestions.

For first his Majesties Revenew is no way increased, as doth appeare by their payments into his Majesties Exchequer, being in all but 700. l. whereas they have received Impost, and remaine debtors to his Majesty many thousands, as by further examination and proofe of their accompts will appeare.

Secondly, Navigation hath beene much hindred thereby, as by a former Petition of the Trinity house to his Majesty and the Lords of the privy Councell appeareth, as also it hath beene sufficiently proved before the Committee for the Salt businesse, by the Master and Wardens of the Trinity Company, who are most sensible of the destruction and advancement of the Shipping and Navigation of this Kingdome.

Thirdly, they have so cherished the home manufacture, by laying a heavy Impost upon it, that those that had 240. Pannes of their own, and were thriving people at the Shields, before their Patents were of force, and were the makers there of Salt, are by the meanes of these Patentees become so poore, that the greater part of them are not able to buy coals to set their Pannes on worke. And those the Patentees who bought 34. Pannes of the old traders, did cease working for the most part of the years 1639. and 1640. by reason they could not attaine to their intended price of 56. s. 8. d. per Wey at the Shields. So that whereas there was formerly made at the Shields before their Patents began about 16000. Wey per annum, they made in the time of the first Patent, which continued about three yeares and a halfe, not above 10000. Wey per annum. And in the time of the latter Patent but 8000. Wey per annum, even before the comming in of the Scottish Army into those parts: by all which appeares how much they have destroyed the native manufacture, and have no wayes advanced or increased it, as they pretended.

Fourthly, for their pretences of the generall good of the Subject, in place whereof they have so oppressed the Subject in generall, that not onely the traders in Salt of the City of London, have justly complained of their grievances to the Honourable Court of Parliament, but also Salt-refiners of Essex and Suffolke, also many Merchants in the West parts as far as Weymouth, as also from Yarmouth, and many other ports North as farre as Newcastle, that came up to London onely to informe the Court of Parliament of the great burden they have beene forced to lye under, even to many of their undoings: And many more would come up, had they not beene so impoverished by them the Patentees, that they are not able to beare their charges in comming so farre to complaine of their grievances. In generall, they have been the oppressors of Fishermen, and all the subjects of these North East parts of England, to the value of many thousand pounds in estimation, above fourescore thousand pounds since the time of their entring into these Patents, which can be made plainly to appeare by one yeares importation for forraigne and Scottish Salt, collected out of the Custome-house bookes, and Meters bookes of London, and for native Salt out of their owne bookes.

Viz.

In the yeare 1637. (which was in the time of their first Patent) of Bay and Spanish Salt there was imported but 1364. Wey, which at 48. s. 6 d. per Wey, is impost 3307. l. 14. s. whereas in the yeare 1634. when the trade was free there was 4620. Wey of forraigne Salt imported, by which may be observed the decay of forraigne Trade during the time of their Impost.

That the Impost of forraigne Salt was received and taken of all the Subjects between Barwicke and Southampton, by vertue of Privy Seale dated in May 1636. procured by Edward Nattall, and others his associates, but nothing brought to accompt by them, nor paid to his Majesties use for the two yeares and 6. moneths, (as can yet appeare.)

That of Scottish and native white Salt Shields measure, there were expended for land use about 16000. Weyes, which at 10. s. per Wey Impost, and 10. s. per Wey increase of price, which came to passe by the Patentees contracting with the Scotch for deare selling, and can appeare to be damage to the subjects at least in one yeare, in the price of the white Salt 16000. l.

That for Fishers use of Scottish and native Salt, an estimate of 3000. Shields Wey, and upwards, at 3. s. 4. d. per Wey Impost, and 6. s. 8. d. increase of price, is at least 1500. l.

Whereby it appeares that the subjects suffered in one yeare by the first Salt Patents, &illegible; l. 15. s.

That the Patentees for Salt continued their first and second Patents above 5. yeares.

By all which it is manifest how profitable these Patents have beene to the Patentees, how little benefit hath accrued to his Majesty thereby, how great a burden to the Subjects in generall, and to the old Salt makers, and the Merchants for forraigne Salt, and all Fishermen, who use great quantities thereof, and to all traders in the same in their particulars. But if any trader in Salt hath either joyned with those Patentees in any indirect way, thereby to uphold them, or the extreme price of Salt, they are not hereby intended to be excused, but to be left to the consideration of the Honourable House of Parliament.

And whereas Horth and his Associates seek to justifie their Patent, comparing it with that which Master Murford intended (which would also have beene alike illegall with theirs, by laying an Impost on native Salt (as they have practised.)

For answer thereunto is said, that the unlawfulnesse of Murfords Patent intended, cannot make that of Horths to bee lawfull which was practised by him. For as well that of Horths, as also the first Patent, have beene sufficiently discussed by the Committee appointed by the Honourable House of Commons now assembled in Parliament, for the hearing of that businesse, and is by them most justly condemned to be illegall, a Monopoly, and prejudiciall to the Commonwealth. For so it is, that a Monopoly is a kinde of commerce in buying and selling usurped by a few, and sometimes by one person, and forestalled by them or him from all others, to the gaine of the Monopolist, and to the detriment of other men.

That the latter Patentees further proceed in their justification, declaring the low rates the subjects have beene served at since the time of the settlement of their Patent, which is (as they say) at 1. d. ob. per Gallon at the most, which in truth is a most intolerable exaction on the subject. For 1. d. ob. per gallon is no lesse then 50. s. a Shields Wey, which is but five eight parts of a London Wey, and so the fraught being added, which is 10. s. a Shields Wey, without Impost, it will stand the Adventurer in no lesse then 4. l. 16. s. a Wey London measure, whereas it may bee afforded, delivered at London, for 3. l. 12. s. per Wey, which is after the rate of 35. s. per Wey to the Salt makers at Shields for their Wey, at which said price of 35. s. per Wey, the old Salt makers say, they can afford it, but not under.

And for the rate of 1. d. per Gallon, which is the cheape price they so much boast on, it being but 33. s. 4. d. a Wey Shields measure, at which price, if they sold any so cheape, it was much against their wills, for they desired and alwayes sought to settle it at 56. s. 8. d. per Wey Shields measure for land use, and 46. s. 8. d. for the fishing Sea expence, which are the prices laid downe in the latter Patent: yet it is true, that they sold some at lower rates: but they were forced thereto by meanes of the great plenty that was brought in by the Scots, who sold it at London, Yarmouth, and some other Ports at 3. l. a Wey, in Anne 1639. and some under that price, as aforesaid, whereupon the Patentees gave over making Salt at Shields in their 34 pannes, in regard they could not attaine to their intended price of 56. s. 8. d. a Shields Wey, yet some of the old Salt makers still wrought, (though to their great losse, and some of their undoings) selling it not for above 30. s. per Wey, yet notwithstanding they the Patentees took of them the old Saltmakers, without any moderation or compassion, the full impost of 10. s. for every Shields Wey, for Land use, and 3. s. 4. d. per Wey, for the fisliery expence. For they had forced the old Saltmakers and Salt refiners to enter into bond, for the payment therof unto them, which if they refused to do, they violently forced them of the Sheilds, of great Yarmouth, and Salt Refiners of Essex and Suffolke thereunto by imprisoning of some, committing of others into Pursuivants hands, and causing others to come up and answer at the Councell Table, to their great expence both of money and time, which extreamity Horth used in that time he was governour more then any other either of the first or second Patentees.

That in the Months of September, October and November last, Salt became decret then it was in eight or nine yeares before, which came to passe partly by reason of the great impost continued by the Patentees of the last Patent, both on the native and forraigne Salt, and partly by reason of the imbarring of the Scottish trade, and the comming in of the Scottish Army, at that time into Newcastle and Shields, so that white Salt was sold in October last at the port of London at 6. l. 10. s. per Wey, and Bay Salt in November last, was sold at the port of London for 8. l. per Wey, in regard Master Strickson, Master Nuttall, and Master Duke, three of the last Patentees continued the taking impost even untill this present Parliament, which three were also chiese of the Projectors of the first Patent.

That the 23. of November last, the Honourable Assembly of Parliament upon a Petition of the traders in Salt of London, injoyned the Patentees to bring in their Patents & cease taking impost, and thereupon the price both of White and Bay Salt did fall at the port of London to 3. l. a Wey, and some for lesse: but the windes proving contrary in the latter part of December, January and February last, for above ten weekes together: And also small store of Salt having been laid up in London, or made at Shields by reason of the troubles in those parts with the Scottish Army, the store of white Salt for want of supply was soone spent here at London: and had it not beene that the Parliament before that time had taken off the Impost of forraigne Bay and Spanish Salt, whereby there was good quantities of forraigne Salt brought in, this City of London had been so necessitated for Salt, as the like hath not been knowne. Yet from the Kings Store house, and the East India Company, and other such like places, there was some small quantities of white Salt found, which supplyed the present want thereof, and was sold in those deerest times at or neere Billingsgate by some of the Traders in Salt for 6. s. 8. d. per Bushell at most, but Bay Salt all that time was sold for 22. d. or 2. s. a bushell, and not above all that time, which was in the Moneth of February, but before that Moneth was expired, and ever since it hath beene sold for 2. s. per Bushell, and five peckes to the Bushell, at or neare Billingsgate.

And whereas the Patentees alledge that white Salt was sold for 2. s. a pecke, at that instant day, when they published their printed papers, it is manifestly to bee proved that ten or twelve daies before they published them, white Salt was cryed in London streets at 5. d. a pecke, and so ever since, which proves their printed papers to be scandalous and false, in laying forth so many imputations upon the Traders in Salt, as though they were the cause of deare selling, which was only their continued impositions, and the occasion of the time as afore is shewed.

That before the Patentees had obtained their Patent for Salt there was imported yearly to London great quantities of Spanish, Straits, and French Salt, by Merchants, Navigators and Traders. And that many hundred Weyes thereof were from thence yearly transported for Flanders, Holland, Denmarke, and the East Countrie, whereby ships had their imployments both inwards and outwards, his Majesties Customes improved, and many poore people, as Porters and Labourers had their maintenance thereby; which trade of Importation is in a manner wholly decayed since the time these severall Patents were obtained.

Objections and Observations.

THat their Patents are found by the Committee appointed by the Parliament for hearing the Salt businesses to be illegall, and a Monopoly, by reason they brought an impost on the native Manufacture, and many other oppressions to the Subject.

That the prosecution hath beene most violent by imprisonments, and forcing many out of their Trades, and also Salt Refiners and Saltmakers, at Shields and great Yarmouth from their works; and the first Patentees forced divers at Shields to let them their Pannes at a Rent, which after two yeares and sixe monthes use, they returned into their hands much decayed, and not satisfied for Rent.

That they would have forced his Majesties Subjects to the only use of white Salt, which is not so sufficient for fishing Voiages and many other uses, as the forraigne.

That they forced the price both of white & Bay Salt, in the time of their Patents, to one third part more then otherwise it would have beene sold for.

That there was a far greater quantity of Salt made in England before their Patents began, then in the time of the continuance of their Patents.

That Horth at a hearing at Councell Table the 19. of December, 1638. to maintaine his unjust cause in taking his Patent, and upon some speech, which was moved about the insufficiency of white Salt for preserving of Fish, and an ancient Trader there saying, that the very scales fell off through the weaknesse of the white Salt; he the said Horth did most falsly reply and affirme, that Codde and Ling Fish had no scales, which he did to convince them of error who came to oppose him: and he with others (whose names are well knowne) did then and there before his Majesty and the Lords of the Councell so farre maintaine it, that they were believed, and that the others that spake the truth, were rejected, whereby the King and Lords were abused by the said Horth and others, by denying that to the creature which it had received in the creation either for defence or ornament.

That it is and hath beene proved both before his Majesty and the Lords, and also before the Committee by the Trinity house Masters, that if forraigne Salt be prohibited, or some heavy impost be laid upon it, Navigation will be much hindred and decaied.

That Horth alone above the rest of his partners obtained a Commission out of the Exchequer, and did thereby put men to their corporall oaths, to confesse what Salt of their owne or of others, they knew to be imported, and told the Commissioners hee was at Councel about that particular, and his Councell advised him, it must bee so, and to bee sure, would bee with the Commissioners himselfe, and urge it.

That the settled moderate rate (as the Patentees pleased to call it) of 56. s. 8. d. per Wey Shields measure, will stand the Adventurer delivered at London in 5. l. 6. s. 8. d. per wey, which is now since their Patent ceased sold at this City of London for 3. l. 10. s. per wey, and long before their Patents began, it was sold cheaper, (that time of three or foure yeares of hostility with France and Spaine, when there could be little forraigne Salt imported, onely excepted.) And Bay Salt at present is sold at 3. l. per wey.

That beyond the power of the Patents, Horth constrained the Salt refiners of divers. Counties to pay a double Impost.

That if the commodity of Salt be free for all men to import, or make it, there cannot be that ingrossing, forestalling, or regrating made which may be done by a few monopolizing Patentees, who having the command of it all, may conferre the commodity upon some few particular Traders, for some sinister respects, to the destruction of others in their Trades, (as the late times of their Patents have made manifest.) And for those 27. yeares afore specified, the commodity of Salt being then free of Impost, the price was alwayes reasonable, and would be so now, and so continue, without the helpe of any Projector.

That a free trade which is now so much desired of the subject, and a settled price, desired of the Patentee, cannot consist, for a constant price forced upon a native manufacture is a principall part of a Monopoly.

That forraigne Salt being absolutely necessary for speciall uses, the inhibition thereof cannot be admitted, but to the great prejudice of the subject.

That these Projectors, which pretend so much of supporting the home manufacture of Salt, have in a maner destroyed it, by laying so heavy an Impost upon it, as 16. s. for every London Wey. And if it be not supported by taking off the foresaid Impost, it is like utterly to decay, and then indeed (the Salt Wiches onely excepted) this Kingdome must wholly depend upon forraigne parts, for all the Salt shall be therein expended.

(The premises considered) the humble request to the Honourable House of Commons now assembled in PARLIAMENT, is, That they would be pleased, that the Projectors and late Patentees for Salt may be brought to an account upon the premisses, that so it may appeare what profits have accrued to his Majesty, and what disadvantage to the Subject, and what persons have beene molested and vexed by reason of them, that so reparations and redresse may be made to the parties so vexed and grieved, as in the judgement of the Honourable Assembly shall be thought expedient.

FINIS.

 


8.3. Anon., The Lamentable Complaints of Nick Froth the Tapster (May 1641)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., The Lamentable Complaints of Nick Froth the Tapster, and Rulerost the Cooke. Concerning the restraint lately set forth against drinking, potting and piping on the Sabbath Day, and against selling meate. Printed in the yeare, 1641.

Estimated date of publication

May, 1641.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 14; Thomason E. 156. (4.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

Concerning the restraint lately set forth, against drinking, potting, and piping on the Sabbath-day, and against selling meate.

Froth.

MY honest friend Cooke Ruffin well met, I pray thee what good newes is stirring.

Cook.

Good news (said you?) I, where is’t? there is such newes in the world, will anger thee to heare of, it is as bad, as bad may be.

Fr.

Is there so? I pray thee what is it, tell me whatsoever it be.

Co.

Have you not heard of the restraint lately come out againstus, from the higher Powers; whereby we are commanded not to sell meat nor draw drink upon Sundays, as we wil answer the contrary at our perils.

Fr.

I have heard that some such thing was intended to be done, but never before now, that it was under black and white: I hope there is no such matter: Art thou sure this thy news is true?

Co.

Am I sure, I ever roasted a fat Pig on a Sunday untill the eyes dropt out, thinke you. S’foot, shall I not credit my owne eyes.

Fr.

I would thine had dropt out too, before ever thou hadst seen this, and if this be your news, you might have kept it, with a pox to you.

Co.

Nay, why so chollerick my friend, you told me you would heare me with patience, whatsoever it were.

Fr.

I cry thee heartily mercy, honest Rulerost, I am sorry for what I said, it was my passion made me forget my self so much: but I hope this command as you speake, will not continue long, will it thinke you Master Cooke?

Co.

Too long to our greife I feare, the Church-Wardens, Side-men, and Constables, will so look to our red Lattices, that we shall not dare to put our heads out of doors on a Sunday hereafter. What think you neighbour, is it not like to prove so?

Fr.

Truely it is much to be feared; but what do you think will become of us then, if these times hold?

Co.

Faith, Master Froth, we must shut up our doors and hang padlocks on them, and never so much as take leave of our Land-lords.

Fr.

Master Rulerost, I jumpe with you in opinion for if I tarry in my house till quarter-day, my Land-lord, I feare, will provide me a house gratis. I am very unwilling to trust him, he was alwayes wonderfull kind, and ready to help any of his debtors to such a curtisie; to be plaine with you, I know not in which of the Compters I shall keep my Christmas, if I doe not wisely by running away prevent him.

Co.

Thou hast spoke my owne thoughts, but I stand not so much in danger of my griping Land-lord, as I doe of Master Kill-calfe my Butcher, I am run into almost halfe a yeares arrerages with him; I do owe him neare ninety pounds for meat, which I have had of him at divers and sundry times, as by his Tally, may more at large appeare.

Fr.

I my selfe am almost as farre in debt to my Brewer, as you are to your Butcher; I had almost forgotten that, I see I am no man of this World; if I tarry in England: He hath often threatned to make dice of my bones already, but ile prevent him; ile shew him the bagg, I warrant him.

Co.

He had rather you would shew him the money and keep the bagge to your selfe.

Fr.

I much wonder, Master Rulerost why my trade should be put downe, it being so necessary in a Common-wealth: why, the noble art of drinking, it is the soule of all good fellowship, the marrow of a Poets Minervs, it makes a man as valiant as Harcules, though he were as cowardly as a French man; besides, I could prove it necessary for any man sometimes to be drunk, for suppose you should kill a man when you are drunk, you shall never be hanged for it untill you are sober; therefore I thinke it good for a man to be alwayes drunk: and besides it is the kindest companion, and friendliest sin of all the seven; for most fins leave a man by some accident or other, before his death. But this will never forsake him till the breath be out of his body: and lastly, a full bowle of strong beere will drowne all sorrowes.

Co.

Master Nick, you are mistaken, your trade is not put downe as you seeme to say; what as done, is done to a good intent; to the end that poore men that worke hard all the weeke for a little money, should not spend it all on the Sunday while they should be at some Church, and so consequently there will not be so many Beggers.

Fr.

Alack you know all my profit doth arise onely upon Sundays, let them but allow me that priviledge, and abridge me all the weeke besides: S’foot, I could have so scowred my young sparks up for a peny a demy Can, or a halfe pint, heapt with froth. I got more by uttering halfe a Barrell in time of Divine service, then I could by a whole Barrell at any other time, for my customers were glad to take any thing for money, and thinke themselves much ingaged to me; but now the case is altered.

Co.

Truely Master Froth, you are a man of a light constitution, and not so much to be blamed as I that am more solid: O what will become of me! I now thinke of the Iusty Surloines of roast Beefe which I with much policy divided into an innumerable company of semy stices, by which, with my provident wife, I used to make eighteene pence of that which cost me but a groat (provided that I sold it in service time,) I could tell you too, how I used my halfe Cans and my Bloomesbury Pots, when occasion served; and my Smoak which I sold dearer then any Apothecary doth his Physick: but those happy dayes are now past, and therefore no more of that.

Fr.

Well, I am rid of one charge which did continually vex me by this meanes.

Co.

I pry thee what was that?

Fr.

Why Master Rulerost, I was wont to be in see with the Apparitors, because they should not bring me into the Bawdy Court for selling drinke on Sundayes. Ile assure you they used to have a Noble a quanter of me, but now they shall excuse me, they are like to have no more quartridge of me, and indeed the truth is, their trade begins to be out of request aswell as ours.

Co.

I, trust me neighbour, I pity them; I was as much troubled with those kind of Rascals as your self, onely I confesse I paid them no quartridge, but they tickled my beefe, a stone of beef was no more in one of their bellies, then a man in Pauls; but now I must take occasion to ease my self of that charge; and with confidence I will now bid them, Walke knave, walke.

Fr.

Truely Master Rulerost, it doth something ease my mind when I thinke that we have companions in misery. Authority I perceive is quick sighted, it can quickly espie a hole in a knaves coate. But Master Cooke we forget our selves, it groweth neare supper time, and we must part, I would tell you what I intend to doe, but time prevents me, therefore ile refer it untill the next time we meet; And so farewell.

FINIS.

 


8.4. Katherine Chidley, The Justification of the Independant Churches of Christ (October, 1641)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Katherine Chidley, The Justification of the Independant Churches of Christ. Being an Answer to Mr. EDVVARDS his BOOKE, which hee hath written against the Government of CHRISTS CHVRCH, and Toleration of CHRISTS Publike Worship; BRIEFELY DECLARING That the Congregations of the Saints ought not to have Dependancie in Government upon any other; or direction in worship from any other than CHRIST their HEAD and LAVV-GIVER. By KATHERINE CHIDLEY.
1 SAM. 17. 45. Thou commest unto me with a Sword, and with a Speare, and with a Sheild, but I come unto thee in the name of the Lord of Hoasts the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied.
IVDGES 4. 21. Then Iael, Hebers wife tooke a naile of the tent, and tooke an ham|mer in her hand, and went softly unto him, and smote the naile into his temples and fastened it into the ground, (for he was fast asleepe and weary) and so he died.
LONDON, Printed for WILLIAM LARNAR, and are to be sold at his Shop, at the Signe of the Golden Anchor, neere Pauls-Chaine. 1641.

Estimated date of publication

October, 1641.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, pp. 37–38; Thomason E. 174 (7.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

TO The CHRISTIAN READER; Grace, Mercy, and Peace, from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ.

IT is, and hath beene (for a long time) a Question more enquired into than well weighed; Whether it be lawfull for such, who are informed of the evills of the Church of England, to Separate from it: For my owne part, considering that the Church of England is governed by the Canon Lawes (the Discipline of Antichrist) and altogether wanteth the Discipline of Christ, and that the most of them are ignorant what it is, and also doe professe to worship God by a stinted Service-Booke. I hold it not onely lawfull, but also the duty of all those who are informed of such evills, to separate themselves from them, and such as doe adhere unto them; and also to joyne together in the outward profession and practise of Gods true worship, when God hath declared unto them what it is; and being thus informed in their minds of the knowledge of the will of God (by the teaching of his Sonne Jesus Christ) it is their duty to put it in practise, not onely in a Land where they have Toleration, but also where they are forbidden to preach, or teach in the name (or by the power) of the Lord Jesus.

But Mr. Edwards (with whom I have here to deale) conceiving that the beauty of Christs true worship, would quickly discover the Foggy darkenesse of the Antichristian devised worship; and also that the glory of Christs true Discipline, grounded and founded in his Word, would soone discover the blacknesse and darkenesse of the Antihristian Government (which the poore people of England are in bondage unto) hath set his wits a work to withstand the bright comming of Christs Kingdome (into the hearts of men) which we are all commanded in the most absolute rule of Prayer to petition for; for the turning aside whereof Mr. Edwards hath mustred up his forces, even eight Reasons, against the government of Christ, which hee calls Independant; and hath joyned unto these eight, ten more; which he hath made against Toleration; affirming that they may not practise contrary to the course of the Nation wherein they live, without the leave of the Magistrate, neither judgeth he it commendable in them to aske the Magistrates leave, nor commendable in the Magistrate to heare their petitions, but rather seeketh to stirre up all men to disturbe their peace, affirming most unjustly, that they disturbe the peace of the Kingdome, nay, the peace of three Kingdomes, which all the lands under the Kings Dominions know to be contrary, nay I thinke most of the Kingdomes in Europe cannot be ignorant what the cause of the disturbance was;

But this is not the practise of Mr. Edwards alone, but also of the whole generation of the Clergie; as thou maist know, Christian Reader, to was the practise of the Bishop of Canterbury to exclaime against Mr. Burton, Doctor Bastwicke, and Mr. Prynne, calling them scandalous Libellers, & Innovators (though they put their own name to that which they write, and proved what they taught by divine authority) and this hath beene alwayes the practise of the instruments of Sathan, to accuse the Lords people, for disturbing of the peace, as it hath beene found in many Nations, when indeede the troublers be themselves and their fathers house. But in this they are like unto Athalia crying treason, treason, when they are in the treason themselves.

But for the further strengthning of his army, he hath also subjoyned unto these his Answer to fixe Reasons, which he saith, are theirs, but the forme of some of them seemeth to be of his owne making; all which thou shalt finde answered, and disproved in this following Treatise.

But though these my Answers are not laid downe in a Schollerlik way, but by the plaine truth of holy Scripture; yet I beseechthee have the patience to take the paynes to reade them, and spare some time to consider them; and if thou findest things disorderly placed, labour to rectifie them to thine own mind. And if there be any weight in them, give the glory to God; but if thou feest nothing worthy, attribute not the weakenesse thereof to the truth of the cause, but rather to the ignorance and unskilfulnesse of the weake Instrument.

Thine in the Lord Jesus,

Katherine Chidlet.

THE Answer to Mr. Edvvards his Introdvction.

I Hearing the complaints of many that were godly, against the Booke that Mr. Edwards hath written; and upon the sight of this his Introduction considering his desperate resolution, (namely) that he would set out severall Tractates against the whole way of Separation. I could not but declare by the testimony of the Scripture it selfe, that the way of Separation is the way of God, who is the author of it,* which manifestly appeares by his separating of his Church from the world, and the world from his Church in all ages.

When the Church was greater than the world, then the world was to be separated from the Church; but when the world was greater than the Church, then the Church was to separate from the world.

As for instance,

When Caine was a member of the Church, then the Church was greater than the world; and Caine being discovered, was exempted from Gods presence;* before whom he formerly had presented himselfe:c but in the time of Noah, when the world was greater than the Churchd then Noah and his Family who were the Church, were commanded to goe into the Arkee in which place they were saved, when the world was drowned,f yet Ham being afterward discovered, was accursed of his Father, and Shem was blessed, and good prophesied for Iaphat.

Afterward when the world was grown mightier than the Church againe, then Abraham was called out of Vr of the Caldeans, both from his country and from his kindred, and from his fathers houseg (because they were &illegible;) to worship God in Canaan.

Moreover, afterwards Moses was &illegible; and his brother &illegible; to deliver the children of Israel out of the Land of Egypt when Pharaoh vexed them,h at which time God wrought their deliverance,i separating wondrously between the Egyptians and the Israelites, and that which was light to the one, was darkenesse to the other.

Afterwards, when Corah and his Congregation rebelled against God, and were obstinate thereink the people were commanded to depart from the tenis of those &illegible; I &illegible; were the children separated from the parents, and those who did not separate, were destroyed by fire,lm and swallowed by the earth,n upon the day which God had appointed* as those Noahs time, who repented not, were swallowed by &illegible;.

Moreover, when God brought his people into the promised Land, he commanded them to be separated from the Idolatrous and not to meddle with the accursed things.Deut. 5. 26. 27. And for this cause God gave them his Ordinances and Commandements; and by the manifestation of their Obedience to them they were knowne to be the onely people of God,* which made a reall separation.

Ezza. 1. Hag. 1. 2, 3. 4. 8. 12. 14.And when they more carried captive into Babylon at any time for their sinnes: God raised them up deliverors to bring them from thence: and Prophets to call them from thencep and from their backesliding.q And it was the practise of all the Prophets of God, (which prophesied of the Church under the New Testament) to separate the precious from the vile, and God hath declared that bee that so doth shall be as his mouth, Jer. 15. 19.

And we know it was the practise of the Apostles of the Lord Iesus, to declare to the people that there could be no more agreement betweene beleevers and unbeleevers, than betweene light and darkenesse, God and Belial, as Paul writing to the Corinthians doth declare, when he saith, Be not unequally yoked together with unbeleevers; for what fellowship hath righteousnesse with unrighteousnesse? and what communion hath light with darkenesse, and what concord hath Christ with Belial?Christ made so great a difference betweene the world and the Church, that hee would not pray for the world; yet would die for the Church, which was given him out of the world; and without a Separation the Church can not be known from the world. or what part hath he that beleeveth with an Infidell? and what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idolls? for yee are the Temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walke in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people; Wherefore come out from among them, and be yet Separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the uncleane thing, and I will receive you, and I will be a Father unto you, and yee shall be my sonnes and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty, 1 Cor. 6. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18.

Moreover, they are pronounced blessed, which reade, heare, and keepe the words of the Booke of the Revelation of Iesus Christ;r among which sentences, there is a commandement from heaven for a totall Separation.s

These things (in briefe) I have minded from the Scriptures, to prove the necessitie of Separation; and though the Scripture be a deepe Well, and containeth in the Treasures thereof innumerable Doctrines and Precepts tending to this purpose; yet I leave the further prosecution of the same, till a fitter opertunity be offered to me, or any other whom the Lord shall indue with a greater measure of his Spirit.

But Mr. Edwards, for preparation to this his desperate intention, hath sent these Reasons against Independant government, and Toleration, and presented them to the Honorable House of Commons; which Reasons (I thinke) he would have to beget a Snake, to appeare (as he saith) under the greene grasse; for I am sure, he cannot make the humble petitions of of the Kings subjects to be a Snake, for petitioning is away of peace and submission, without violence or venum; neither can it cast durt upon any government of the Nation, as he unjustly accuseth the Protestation Protested, for that Author leaveth it to the Magistrate, not undertaking to determine of himselfe what government shall be set ever the Nation, for the bringing of men to God but leaveth it to the consideration of them that have authority.

And whereas Mr. Edwards grudges that they preach so often at the Parliament; in this he is like unto Amazial, who bid the Prophet Amos to flee away into the Land of Judea. and not to Prophesie at Bethel, the Kings Chappeil, and the House of the Kingdome.*

And though Mr. Edwards boast himselfe heare, to be a Minister of the Gospell, and a sufferer for it, yet I challenge him, to prove unto me, that he hath any Calling or, Ordination to the Ministry, but that which he hath successively from Rome; If he lay claime to that; he is one of the Popes household; But if he deny that calling, then is he as void of a calling to the worke of the Ministry, and as void of Ordination, as any of those Ministers, whom hee calleth Independant men, (which have cust off the Ordination of the Prelates) and consequently as void of Ordination as a macanicall trades man.

And therefore I hope that Honourable House that is so full of wisedome (which Mr Edwards doth confesse) will never judge these men unreasonable, because they do Petition, nor their petitions unreasonable before they are tried, and so proved, by some better ground, then the bare entrance of Mr. Edwards his Cavit, or writ of Ne admittas, though he saith he forehed it from heaven; for I know it was never there, Neither is it confirmed by the Records of holy Scripture, but taken from the practise of Nimrod. That mighty Hunter before the Lord,* and from the practise of Haman that wicked persecucuter,* & from the evill behaviour and malicious speeches, and gesture of wicked Sanballet,* and Tobias, who were both bitter enemies to God, and sought to hinder the building of the walles of Jerusalem.

But the Prophet Haggai, reproveth not onely such as hindred the building of the Lords House: but also those that were contented to live in their seyled Houses, and suffer the Lords House to lie waste, Hag. 1.

AN ANSVVER To Mr. Edvvards his Booke, Intituled, Reasons against the Independent Government in particular Congregations.

Mr. EDWARDS,

I Understanding that you are a mighty Champion, and now mustering up yourmighty forces (as you say) and I apprehending, they must come against the Hoast of Israel, and hearing the Armies of the Living God so defied by you, could nor be withheld, but that I (in stead of a better) must needs give you the meeting.

First, Whereas you affirme, That the Church of God (which is his House and Kingdome) could not subsist with such provision as their father gave them: which provision was (by your owne confession) the watering of them by Evangelists, and Prophets, when they were planted by the apostles, and after planting and watering to have Pastors and Teachers, with all other Officers, set over them by the Apostles & their own Election, yet notwithstanding all this provision, the Father hath made for them, it was evident (say you) they could not well stand of themselves, without some other helpe.

This was the very suggestion of Sathan into the hearts of our first Parents; for they having a desire of some thing more then was warranted by God, tooke unto them the forbidden fruit, as you would have the Lords Churches to doe when you say they must take some others besides these Churches and Officers, and that to interpose authoritatively; and these something else you make to be Apostles, Evangelists, and Elders of other Churches, whereas you confessed before, that these are the furniture of Christs Kingdome; and wee know their authoritie was limitted, within the bounds of the Word of God: as first, If any of them would be greater, he must be servant to all. Secondly, they were forbidden to be Lords over Gods heritage. Thirdly, they were commanded to teach the people, to observe onely those things which Christ had commanded them.

And whereas you seeme to affirme, that these Offices were extraordinary and ceased, and yet the Churches have still neede of them: You seeme to contradict your selfe, and would faine cure it againe, in that some other way which you say, you have to supply the want of them, but this other way you have not yet made known: You presuppose, it may be by some Smods and Councels, to make a conjunction of the whole.

If you meane such a Counsell, as is mentioned; Acts 15. 4. 22. consisting of Apostles and Elders with the whole Church; then you have said no more than you have said before, and that which we grant, for this is still the furniture of the Kingdome; but if you intend that your Counsell should consist of an armie of Arch-Bishops Diocesan Bishops, Deanes, Suffragans, with the rest of that rabble, which be for their titles names of blasphemy, and such as were bred in the smoake of the pit. I deny that any of these be ordained of God, for they have no footing in his word; therefore indeede these are a part of the fruit of the forbidden Tree, which the Churches of God have taken and eaten; and this seeking out inventions of their owne, after that God made them righteous, hath brought them into a state of Apostasie, even as Ieroboams high places and Calves did the people of Israel; which may plainely appeare by the Churches of Asia. If these be that some other supply which you meane and have produced to helpe the Churches, and Cities of God (as you call them) to determine for those Churches and Cities the cases of Doctrine and Discipline in stead of those many Ministers which, you conceive them now to want, it tends to make (as they have now done) a conjunction not onely of all the Churches prosessing one faith into one body; but also of all the Armies of the Man of Sinne, and so to confound the Church and the world together, which the Ministers of the Gospell ought to divide,Iss. 15. 19. by separating the precious from the vile.

And whereas you affirme, The Independent Congregations now have but few Ministers;

It is very true, for indeede they are but a few people, and a few hands will feede a few mouths sufficiently, if God provide meat.

But whereas you affirme, That those Congregations may have no Officer, at all by their owne grounds, and yet be independent.

I thinke, they conceive by those grounds, the Office onely of Pastor, and Teacher; but not that the Church of God hath need at any time of the helpe of any other, then God hath given and set in his Church, which be all the Officers that are before mentioned, as Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers; and to have recourse to any for counsell, helpe, or assistance, either of Church or Ministry, which is not of Christs owne, were very ridiculous. For it is recorded, Ephe. 4. 11. 12. That he gave these for the gathering together of the Saints for the worke of the Ministry, and for the edification of the body of Christ, being so gathered;Verse 13. 14. 16. The time they must continue is, till all the Saints be in the unitie of faith. The reason wherefore they were given, was to keepe people from being tossed too and fro with every winde of Doctrine. And these are they, by whom all the body is coupled and knit together,Compared with 1 Cor. 12. by every joynt for the furniture thereof, according to the effectuall power, which is in the measure of every part, and receiveth increase of the body unto the edifying of it selfe in love. And this is according to the promise that Christ made, Matth. 28. 19. 20. to be with his Ministers in teaching his people to the end of the world.

And thus you may see Mr. Edwards, you cannot gather from our owne words, that we have neede of the helpe of any other Churches, or Ministers, to interpose (as you unjustly affirme) as it may plainely appeare by Mr. Robinsons owne words in the Justification of the Separation, pag. 121. 122. These are his words; It is the Stewards duty to make provision for the family; but what if he neglect this duty in the Masters absence? Must the whole family starve, yea and the wife also? Or is not some other of the family best able to be employed for the present necessity? The like he saith concerning the government of a Ship, of an Armie, and of Commonwealths; alluding to the Church of Christ. And further expresseth, that as a private Citizen may become a Magistrate, so a private member may become a Minister, for an action of necessity to be performed, by the consent of the rest, &c.

Therefore it appeares plainely by all that hath binsaid, that the Churches of Christ may be truely constituted according to the Scripture, and subsist a certaine time without Pastor and Teacher, and enjoy the power of Christ amongst themselves having no dependancie upon any other Church or Churches which shall claime Authority or superiority over them.

And thus much for your first Reason.

NOw in your second Reason, which runneth upon the calling of the Ministry, you affirme, That the government of the Independent Congregations is not of divine institution.

Which I utterly denie, and will prove it, by disproveing the following. Instances, by which you affirme to prove it.

Whereas you affirme, That their Independencie forces them to have Ministers without Ordination.

I Answer, it is a plaine case by the foregoing Answer, to your first Reason, that you speake untruely, for their practise is there made knowne to be otherwise; and if you will still affirme, that they have not power so to practise, you will thereby deny the truth of the Scriptures; for the Apostles were commanded to teach the Churches, to observe all things whatsoever Christ had commanded them. But Christ commanded the Apostles to ordaine Elders in every Church by election; therefore the Apostles taught the Churches to ordaine Elders by Election also. And whereas you bid us produce one instance (if we can) for an ordinary Officer to be made without Ordination, it is needlesse; for we (whom you call Independant) strive for no such thing, as you have proved it plainely out of Mr. Robinsons Booke, Apol. Chap. 1. 18. to which I send you to learne better.

Further you alleadge, That if they be ordained, it is by persons who are not in office.

Now if you meane, they have no office because they are not elected, ordained and set apart by the Clergie to some serviceable, administration; I pray you tell me who ordained the Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists to their worke or Ministry? If you will say they were ordained of God, I will grant it, and doe also affirme that God hath promised the supply of them, to the end of the world, as before hath beene mentioned, from Ephe. 4. As a so, it appeares by Pauls charge to Timothy; 2 Tim. 2. 2. That what things he had heard of him, among many witnesses, the same he should commit to faithfull men who should be able to teach others also: but I verily doe beleeve, that as Titus, so Timoth, heard of Paul that Elders must be ordained by Election in every city, and that Titus was as much bound to communicate the things unto others, which he had learned of Paul, as Timothy was, and Timothy (we know) was to teach faithfull men, and those faithfull men were to teach others those things that they had heard of Timothy, among which things Ordination was one, as it was delivered to Titus; and we are not to doubt of Timothius faithfulnesse in the declaring of this part of his message more than the rest, but if those to whom Timothy delivered it, were not faithfull in the discharge of their duty: but that in due time the Ordinances might possibly grow out of use, as the Churches did by little and little apostate; yet that hinders not but that it was still written in the Scripture that the generations to come might recover againe the right use of the Ordinances when God should by his Spirit direct them to know the same.

Moreover, I affirme, that all the Lords people, that are made Kings and Priests to God, have a free voyce in the Ordinance of Election, therefore they must freely consent before there can be any Ordination; and having so consented they may proceede to Ordination, notwithstanding they be destitute, of the Counsell or assistance of any neighbour Church; as if there were no other Churches in the Land, but onely one company of beleevers joyned together in fellowship, according to Christs institution. The promise made in the 14th, of Iohn 12. 13. is made unto them, where Christ said. The workes that he did they should doe &illegible; & that whatsoever they should aske in his name, that he would do for &illegible; that the Father may be glorified, and that the Spirit of truth should dide with them for ever. And that he should teach them all things, and bring all things unto their remembrance, as it is said in the following verses of the same Chapter. This (you may see) is the portion of beleevers, and they that have this portion are the greatest in the world, and many of them are greater than one, but many joyned together in a comely order in the fellowship of the Gospell, according to the Scriptures, are the greatest of all and therefore have power to ordaine, and to blesse their Ministers in the name of the Lord. Thus the lesser is blessed of the greater.

Now Mr. Edwards, I hope you will confesse, that you spake unadvisedly, when you affirmed, The maintenance of Independensie, was the breaking of Gods Ordinance, and violating of that Order and constant way of Ministers recorded in the Word.

To this I Answer, that if the Church doe elect one, he must be elected out of some more, & those that are not elected, may be as able to blesse the Church in the name of the Lord, as he, therefore one of these who are not elected, being chosen by the whole Church, to blesse him in the name of the Lord, whom the Church hath ordained, is the hand of the whole (who are greatest of all, and so a sufficient Officer for that worke which hee is put a part to doe.

Thus you may see (Mr. Edwards) that we doe not hold Ordination extraordinary and temporary; neither doe we hold it the least of Gods Institutions, for we have respect unto them all; But that nothing in matter of Order hath so cleare and constant a practise as this (as you do affirme) and also say, the whole frame of Church and Discipline, hath not so much ground in the word for it as this. I deny, and doe affirme, that not onely this, but all Gods Ordinances have as much ground and footing in Gods Word also.

Yet notwithstanding you say, that Calvin confesseth, that there is no expresse precept concerning the imposition of hands: Hath the imposition of hands no footing in Gods Word? and yet hath not all the forme of Gods Worship so much footing as it? Here Mr. Calvin and you, will now pin all the forme of Church and Discipline, upon unwritten verities.

Further, you rehearse confusedly, the opinion of Zanchius to strenghen yours who (say you) would have the example of the Apostles and ancient Church, to be more esteemed of, and to be instead of a command.

I pray you, how doe you know it to be their example, if it be not written?

And whereas you alledge, that Zanchius saith, it is no value Ceremony but the holy Spirit is present to performe things inwardly, which are signified by this Ordinance outwardly.

I have granted you that already, where I affirme, that the Church having the Spirit of God hath power by an instrument of her owne chusing, to blesse the party to his worke in the name of the LORD; and I am also bound to beleeve, that God will accompany that his owne Ordinance (which is performed by them outwardly) with his owne Spirit inwardly, to furnish the party (so blessed by them) with the knowledge of the Scripture, which is able to furnish the man of God to every part of his duty. And thus you may see, that we have not departed from Christs way, nor gone any other way, in things concerning his House and Officers, then he hath directed.

And whereas you demand for what cause Paul left Titus at Creete? I answer, that I have told you before, that it was to communicate the things unto others, which hee had learned, whereof Ordination was one. And no doubt but hee declared the same to faithfull men, that they might teach others also, therefore he was there employed in preaching of the Gospell, as well as if he had gone preaching with Paul.

The next thing you goe upon, is the triall of the gifts of Ministers, and this you attribute to them which have the greatest measure of the Spirit, for you say, Examination belongeth to the most skilfull, and they who have most authority.

All these things are well allowed of by us, for who hath a greater measure of the Spirit than beleevers? and who hath more skill than he that hath beene trained up in the Schoole of Christ? and hath learned this Lesson to be obedient to his Master Christ in keeping of all his commandements? and who hath greater authority upon the earth then they that are visible Saints? and what makes men visible Saints? if not the manifestation of their obedience to God the Father, and Christ his sonne, in the practise of all his Ordinances, and not to have some other Presbyters present with them, to assist them, (as you affirme) for by these other Presbyters, I know not yet who you meane.

And whereas you say, that the Church may be led into errours, or kept in a low estate by unfit Pastors and Elders.

I answer, It is a cleare truth; as wofull experience teacheth us, who live here in the Land of England.

And whereas you affirme, that visible Saints cannot ordaine Officers, because they have no gifts of prayer.

I Answer, Here you make prayer the Ordination of Ministers.

And whereas you say they are not able to conceive prayer.

Here you give the holy Ghost the lie: for Beleevers have received the Spirit of adoption to cry Abba Father,

But say you, they cannot conceive prayer according to the action in &illegible;

Here you would seeme to make beleevers, which have the Spirit of God, to leade them into all truths, more voide of common reason, then men that have but gifts of nature.

Againe, you say, they have not gifts to make publike exhortation, and admonition.

To which I answer, If they had first knowledge to feele the want of a Pastor, and also diversable men out of whom to elect and ordaine a Pastor, then they out of whom this person is chosen, are able to exhort, and to admonish: for he that hath not the gift of teaching, may have the gift of exhortation: againe, the man that undertaketh to teach others, ought to be taught by God, and likewise to be able by sound Doctrine to withstand the Gainesayers, but a man may give good exhortations, (and that publikely) that is not able to withstand the Gainesayers by sound Doctrine. By this you may see, the Church of God can never be without some Ministers, except it be (according to that spoken by zachariah) in the day of very small things indeede, when God shall take away their Ministers by death, prison, or exile: for seeing the Churches were planted by Ministers of Gods owne ordaining; therefore they were not without Ministers in the very beginning: and still the Churches are planted by the Ministeriall power of the Lord Jesus, which cannot be exercised without fit instruments; Yet that they must want the word preached, or Sacraments administred, till they have Pastors and Teacher in Office, is yet to be proved, but that page of Mr. Robinsons, which hath beene alledged before, is sufficient for this present purpose against you, even to prove that the family must not be unprovided for, either for the absence or neglect of a Steward.

But now you seeme to insinuate an affirmation, or a supposition, I cannot well tell whether, That a ruleing Elder may be destitute of the guift of discering, and seeme to imply, that if he be destitute, then all the Church must be destitute, if there be no more Officers then be.

Here you would faine make the ruling Elders, the eyes of the Church, and then all the rest of the body must be blinde, and so unfit to have any hand in election, and also voide of the Spirit of Grace to discerne the gifts by, though it hath beene proved unto you before, that she is the greatest of all, having the Spirit of God to leade her into all truth, being the Spouse of Christ, and endowed with all his riches, gifts, and donations.

And thus you still deny the Authority & ability of the Church giving to the persons in office all power and deserning. But this is indeede according to your practise here in England, but not according to the minde and Spirit of God.

And for the neighbour Churches Counsell, I deny not, but that it may be imbraced, and the Saints have cause to praise God for any helpes of Gods ordaining. But if they want the helpe of a neighbour Church to Counsell them, or neighbour Ministers to direct them: yet if they be a Church of Jesus Christ, they have (as hath beene said before) power among themselves to elect and ordaine their owne Officers; as also the Spirit of discerning, whereby to try their gifts, and yet be farre from falling into that evill, which they complaine against in the Episcopacie (namely) for one man to have the sole power of Ordination.

By all these particulars, you may clearely see all your pretended proofes and former assertions disproved, as I promised you, in the entrance of this my answer to your second Reason.

So that these two first Reasons, being (as I conceive) the greatest Champions, which you have sent out in this skirmage, are now both slaine, and made voide of all the life that ever was in them, for, they were made most of suppositions, and of things that appeared unto you by likelihood, without any ground from the Scriptures: and of some other thing than Gods Word allowed: and of some triviall affirmations which were not grounded upon any truth of Gods Word.

Now, these two being thus turned aside, by one of the meanest of all the Army of Jesus Christ, you may justly feare, that all the rest of your souldiers will run away wounded.

IN your third Reason, You say it is not to be thought, that Christ would institute such a Government of his Church which off ords no helpe; nor allowes no way or remedy for innocent persons that are wronged.

Which thing I grant to be very true; but touching the means and helpes which you pleade for, that is, some other Synods to appeale unto, I tell you I know not what Synods you meane. But this I affirme that there are no larger Synods to be kept to settle Church differences, then the comming together of the Ministers, and Brethren, as it is mentioned in the 15th. of the Acts, which I have garnted you in my Answers to your former Reasons.

And whereas you strive for appeales:

I Answer, It is the rule of Christ:Matth. 14. 15. 16. 17. that if one brother doe trespasse against another; and if the brother offending will not be reclaimed by the private admonition of the brother offended, he is to be admonished by one or two other brethren with him; but if he will not heare them, the brother offended is to tell the Church; and if he will not heare the Church, then he is not to be accounted a brother but as a Heathen man and a Publican; if not as a brother, then out of the fellowship: then if the wrong be any personall injury, as oppression, or fraud, or any other finne of these natures, the Law is open, where he may appeale for Justice to the Magistrate in any part of the Kingdome, where-ever he liveth; but if it be a matter of scandall; as if hee should be a drunkard, or incontinent, or the like, then he hath sufficient remedy, when such a one is cast out of his society. By this you may see, the way of government given by Christ Jesus, the King of peace, is the way of peace and righteousnesse.

And whereas you affirme, That if the controversie touching Circumcision, should have beene ended in the Church of Antiochia, then parties must have beene Iudges.

Here, you would seeme by this to make the whole Church of Antioch leavened with the Doctrine of Justification by Circumcision, which to doe is a very great slander, as it appeares by Paul & Barnabas opposing them there, and that Churches sending Paul and Barnabas to have the Churches advise at Ierusalem concerning this matter.

But whereas you affirme,Acts 15. 1. &illegible; That the Church of Antiochia, judged it unequall to decide the case among themselves:

I answer, That they judged it unequall, is more than is expressed in that place: but if that should be granted it will make against you, for their reason in sending the matter to Ierusalem, was, because the parties were members of the Church of Ierusalem, as it appeares by Acts. 15. 1. 5. 24. The first verse sheweth, that they were men of Iudea; the 5th. verse proves that they were Beleevers; The 24th verse declares, that they went out of the Church of Ierusalem unto them. And by this you may see plainely, that this Chapter (above all the Chapters that I can finde) proves Independencie upon your owne ground; that the Church of Antiochia judged it an unequall thing for them to judge the members of the Church of Ierusalem. And by this you may perceive, how you have either erred, not knowing the Scriptures or else you have done worse in labouring to darken the truth by evasions, or false glosses.

Thus much for your third Reason.

IN your fourth Reason you affirme, That the light and Law of Nature, with right reason, is against the Independencie of particular Churches; which is an unjust affirmation as hath beene plainely proved before in the Answer to your third Reason. But a few words concerning this Reason.

You say it is found necessary, in bodies naturall, that the particular members doe joyne in one, for the good of the whole, and that the whole being greater than a part, the severall parts should be subject too, and ordered by the whole: All this I have granted you freely already in the Answer to your second Reason; where I have plainely proved unto you, that the hands of the Church are ordered by the whole body, in the Ordination of the Ministery: And this is according to the very Scripture it selfe, for the holy Ghost speaketh so, in 1 Cor. 12.1 Cor. 12. Comparing the Church of God to the naturall body of a man; and therefore when the hand lanceth the foote, it cannot be said properly to be the action of the hand alone, because the hand is set a worke, by the body; neither can the body set the hand a worke, if it be destitute of the power, for the motion of the body commeth not from the hand but the motion of the hand from the body; and thus you may see I have granted your comparison. And the nearer politicke bodies doe goe to this Rule; the more orderly they are guided; for as all the cities and country of England, make up but one Kingdome, and all the people in England ought to be subject to one King; so all the Independant Congregations in England, and out of England, (that are guided by the Lawes of Christ) make up but one Kingdome spiritually to him that is their King.

Now concerning Armies; though I be very ignorant in these things, yet thus much I conceive, that all the Armies, that belong to the Kingdome ought to be under the banner of their owne King; even so all the particular Congregations of Christ, are to be guided by the Lawes of their owne Captaine Christ, who rideth before them with his garments dipt in blood, and they follow after him riding upon white horses, Revel. 19. 11, 12. 13, 14.

We reade also in the Scripture of another armie, which were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ: And this armie (I conceive) consisteth of those Locusts, which ascended out of the bottomlesse pit, Rev. 9. And these, as I told you before, are Arch-Bishops, Diocesan Bishops, Deanes, Prebends, &c. and the rest of that rabble; and these also have a King over them, which is the Angell of the bottomlesse pit, who is said to be the great red Dragon the Devill and Sathan, Rev. 12. 3. 9. and 20. 2. who gave unto this armie his power and throne, and great authority, Rev. 13. 2. Therefore, to any Counsells that are held, or Canon Lawes that are enacted by any Captaine of this armie, the Churches of Christ ought not to submit, though they should be commanded, by any Statute Law of the Kingdome; for those Statute Lawes are not according to Christs Rule, but ought by all Councells of State to be repealed.

And whereas you say, It is alledged by the Separation; that hold Independancie, That the Magistrate of Leyden cannot governe in Delph:

This I hope you will grant; for I am sure the Magistrates of Coventry cannot execute their office in Shrewsbury, neither can the one Towne chuse Magistrates for the other: and this still proves Independencie, for either of these may chuse their owne, and guide their owne at all times, except they forfeit their Charter.

Now whereas you say, the people alleadge for themselves, that the Law of nature teacheth them to make a Covenant; though there be neither precept nor practise of it in the word.

I suppose you misconster their sayings, for the text alleadged in Thessalonians 40 doth not prove that brotherly love was never written of in the Scripture; but that it had beene so sufficiently taught of God by written precepts, that it needed not to be written againe. Besides, I am able to prove by the Scripture, that there is both precept and practise for a Church Covenant: the which I will answer you in the Answer to your 6th. Reason, where you begge the Question.

Concerning what is asserted by some Divines of Scotland, That in such things as are alike common to the Church, and Commonwealth, and have the same use in both, and that whatsoever natures light directeth the one, directeth the other also.

You know (by what hath beene formerly spoken) I have fully assented unto it.

I also agree with Amesius, as farre as he agrees with the truth; but to agree with you in that falsehood, that the Government of independant Churches, is against the light of nature and right Reason, that I have denied, and disproved sufficiently already.

Thus having answered every particular thing in this Reason, that hath not beene answered already, I proceede to the Fifth.

IN your 5th. Reason you affirme, That there be many Rules in Scripture, that doe require the combination of Churches into Synods; for proofe whereof you say, that Amesius confesseth, the Rules and Commands to be such as these; Let all things be done to edification, decently and in order, Cor. 14. 26. 40. and follow after the things which make for peace, Rom. 14. 19. So Phil. 4. 8. And you conclude that Synods are found to be for edification, peace, and order. But you have brought no Scripture yet that proveth it; and I know all Scripture is against it, therefore I deny it. And as for the Scriptures alleadged (as you say) by Amesius, they are such as were spoken to particular Congregations: and in the particular Congregation of Colosse, Paul beheld a comely order, notwithstanding there were no Synod consisting of any but onely the members and Ministers of that Congregation, Col. 2. 5.

And as for commands, which you say are some generall, and others particular; Here you labour by evasions to turne away the truth; for you your selfe know, that every particular command reacheth not to the generall, though a generall command reach to every particular. Now if you can shew us in the Scriptures any generall command, that all the Churches should, or an example that all the Churches did gather a Councell of some Ministers out of every particular Congregation, to make Decrees or Lawes to impose upon the whole, then you will speake speake something to the purpose, but as yet you have not spoken one word that proveth any such thing.

And whereas you alleadge that Scripture, That the Spirits of the Prophets must be subject to the Prophets, 1 Cor. 14. 32.

I Answer, That that is given to particular Congregations; and therefore not to all in a Province or Nation, and so not to Synods: And Paul never sought to winne credit nor obedience to Orders established by himselfe, (as you say) for he never made any other Orders, nor taught the people any other thing than what he had received of the Lord Jesus, as it is plaine in 1 Cor. 11. Be ye followers of me (saith he) as I am of Christ, and in the 23. verse of the same Chapter, I have received of the Lord (saith he) that which I have delivered unto you. Paul also writes unto these Corinthians, (whom he had converted unto the faith) to be followers of him, 1 Cor. 4. 16. in ver. 17. he sheweth them, that therefore he sent Timothy unto them, to the end that Timothy should put them in remembrance of Pauls wayes in Christ, as Paul had taught every where in every Church. Here you may see Paul brings not the Example of the Synod before them, nor layes upon them any Decree or Command, to practise otherwise than he himselfe had learned in Christ; yet I hope you will not deny, but that this Church spoken of, was a Church of Christ as well as the Church of Colosse.

Now the next thing to be considered is, that which you alleadge of Pauls submission, to the practise of what was agreed upon, by the common consent of Iames, and the rest of the Elders, Acts 21. from. 18. &illegible; 27.

The Reason why they counselled Paul to doe the thing, was, because of the information that the Jewes had then against Paul; that he taught the people to forsake Moses, Acts 21. 21. Now I hope you will not deny, but that this was a false affirmation.

The thing wherein they conceived he transgressed was, by bringing in Trophimus and Ephesian, (as they thought into the Temple) because they saw him with him in the citie.

This was but their supposition, as it appeares in the 29 verse of this Chapter.

Now what the Elders counselled Paul to doe, in respect of giving offence to the Jewes, was no injunction to any to follow the same example, except it were in the same case.

Now Paul himselfe was a Jew, and taught all men that Christ was come to fulfill the Law, and not to destroy the Law; therefore he condescended to circumcise Timothy because his mother was a Jew,Act. 16. 1. 3. and the Jewes knew his father was a Grecian. But Titus a Grecian was not compelled to be circumcised; yea, though there were false brethren craftily crept in, to spy out their liberty; Paul gave not place to them, no not for an houre, Gal 2. 3. 4. 5.

Now the things that the Elders counselled Paul to doe, was to purifie himselfe, with them that had a vow, and to contribute with them; and the reason wherefore they counselled Paul to doe this, was, that it might appeare to the Jewes that Paul was a Jew, and not an uncircumcised person for the Jewes knew that it was a sinfull thing to bring into the Temple any uncircumcised person in heart or flesh, Ezek. 44. 7.

Now Paul in all this did nothing but what was commanded in the Law, as purifications and vowes, &c.

Moreover, this counsell of Iames and the Elders unto Paul, was not generall to the beleeving Jewes; neither was it generally or particularly to the Gentiles, but particularly to Paul, and the rest with him, because of the false report which the Jewes had received of him.

And as this Counsell was not generall, so it was not perpetuall, but served to put an honorable end to the Law, which Christ came to fulfill, and not to destroy.

By all this it appeares, it maketh nothing for any counsell that you plead for, to establish any unwritten verities; for such counsels are the counsels of darkenesse: because they are not according to the Law and the Testimony, it appeares there is no light in them: therefore they are not of authoritie to bind any particular member of the Church, much lesse the generall, as you say they are.

But seeing you confesse, that no Synod can say, It seemeth good unto the holy Ghost and to us; it plainely appeares that your counsels presume without the counsell of the holy Ghost. But you may see, that the Church of Ierusalem did nothing without the counsell of the Spirit, neither determined of anything, that was not written in the Scripture. So the Churches of God now ought to presume to do nothing but what the written Word allowes them; being taught the true meaning thereof by the Spirit that God hath given them.

Moreover, the counsell of Ierusalem imposed nothing upon the Gentiles for a Law, but counselled them to abstaine from some necessary things, which would be either offensive to the Jewes, or sinfull in themselves, Acts 15. 29. 20. 28. 29.

Now seeing the Church of Ierusalem hath done nothing, but by he counsell of the written word, in forbidding things sinfull in themselves and offensive to their brethren, it appeares to be plainely against your Synods, and dependencie in government, which in cases difficult, doe establish things which have no footing in Gods word; neither have they, by your owne confession, in their Counsels any one, who is immediately and infallibly imspired by the Spirit, and able of himselfe to satisfie the controversie, they being by your owne confession inferiour to Paul and Barnabas; And Paul and Barnabas might teach nothing but what was taught in the Law and the Prophets. And therefore, by this it appeares you have not grounded any affirmation or supposition upon Gods word; for the proving either of your Synods or dependencie.

Thus much for your fifth Reason.

IN your sixth Reason you affirme that the government of the Church by Synods, is no where forbidden by God in the new Testament, either directly, or by consequence.

But I doe affirme the contrary, and prove it thus;

That whatsoever Government is not commanded by God is accursed, and that is plainely manifested in the New Testament, Rev. 22. 18.

But your government by Synods is not commanded by God, and therefore it is accursed; as it will appeare in the following discourse.

Whereas you say, that all the Ministers are greater than one:

I have already proved,See the Answer to his second Reason against Independencie. that the Church of Christ is greater than all the Ministers.

You say Synods appoint no other office or Officer in the Church, which Christ hath not appointed.

Me thinkes you are strangely put to your shifts, that dare not tell the world what you meane by your Synods. But if you meane the Councell or Convocation that used to sit at Pauls, I have told you already they are none of the Councell of Christ neither hath he appointed that councell or any other councell, to make, or ordaine, either Officers or Offices for his Church, therefore so to affirme is blasphemie, for he himselfe is their Lord and Law-giver, and hath instituted every particular Ordinance in his Church, that the Church hath neede of, therefore it is (as hath beene said already) against the Law and light of nature, and contrary to edification, order, peace, purenesse, lovelinesse, for any to decree for, or injoyne upon, the Assemblies of the Saints any other practise but those that the Apostles have taught, which they themselves had learned from the Lord Jesus; but as for you Mr. Edwards, it appeareth plainely that you doe not understand nor see the forme of the Lords House; which causeth you to call upon any to produce a particular word, or rule, for the order of Gods worship, what must be performed first, what second, what third, what fourth, and so of the rest; and that no Ordinance, and part of worship may be in another order. Further, you chalenge them if they can, to shew a particular word or rule out of the New Testament, for their Church Covenant, which you say, is the forme of the Church.

You also inquire for the forme of Excommunication, and Ordination, and gestures in the severall Ordinances of God, and this you say they are not able to doe, but onely in generall rules.

I have told you already that generall rules reach to every perticular, and that is no more than you seeme to know already; for you have confessed, that there are generall rules to teach every one of these particulars, which you could not chuse but acknowledge; otherwise you would have made Christ not so faithfull in his house as Moses. But the more you know, the greater is your sinne, in that you labour to turne away the light; and you are still repairing of those thresholds, which have beene set up by Gods thresholds. If I had any hope therefore that you would be ashamed of all that you have done, I would shew you, though not all that I see, yet what I am able to expresse of the forme of the house of God,See Ezck. 43. 11. and the paterne thereof, and the going out thereof, and the comming in thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and the Lawes thereof and write it in your sight, that so you may keepe the whole fashion thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and doe them.

As for the Ordinance of Election, Ordination, and Excommunication &c. I have declared already the forme to them that have their eyes open to see it. But they cannot see the forme of the house, that have not repented them of the evills that they have done, therefore I will cease to strive with such persons, for they may live and stay long enough, and be of no Church of Christ.

Thus much for your Sixth Reason.

IN your 7th. Reason you say, That consociation and combination, in way of Synods, is granted by themselves, (and you produce for your Authors these foure; Christ on his Throne, Examination of Prelates Petition, Syons Prerogative Royal, and the Protestation Protested; which Authors, if the Reader please to examine, shall final cleare against you) That which you have gathered here from these Authors is, that they grant that one Church should be content that matters of difference and importance should be heard by other Churches, as also to be advised and counselled by other Churches, &c.

I answer, though all should confesse, that it is profitable to have the counsell of their brethren and neighbour Churches in doubtfull cases, yet this will be farre from proving the lawfulnesse of your Synods; as may appeare by the Authors that your selfe hath here alledged, for they intend no such Consociation, nor Combination, which you have mentioned: but seeing your selfe would have something which you cannot prove, you would begge of others to grant it or prove it for you.

Concerning the Orders, or Decrees of the Church of Ierusalem (Acts 164) they were not such Decrees as were alterable, but such as were warranted by God, and a perpetuall Rule for all the Churches of the Gentiles.

You neede not tell me what Amesius speaketh of the parts of Discipline, as if any of the Separation, held it to consist all in Excommunication; for I have told you already, that they have seene the forme of the Lords house, and have respect unto all his Ordinances, and doe not take one for all.

Neither is it granted you, that admonitions and reproofes, and decreeing of Excommunications should be by Officers of other Churches, towards members of any Congregation, though in the same constitution; the contrary most evidently appeareth, even by the practise of the Church of Antioch, who brought the matter to the Church of Ierusalem, which concerned the Church of Ierusalems members, neither may any of the Churches now be subject to the censures of other Congregations except they must be subject to humane Ordinances; but in case, both the members, and the Church, be obstinate in any knowne sinne, then are the Churches of God bound to admonish her, and reprove her, and reject her; as if the Church of Antiochia had found the Church of Ierusalem all leavened with the Doctrine of Iustification by circumcision; then had the Church of Antiochia power to admonish, reprove, and reject the Church of Ierusalem, and not have communion with them, if they persisted obstinate in that evill; for the Church of Antiochia was not inferiour in power to the Church of Ierusalem.

Thus much for your seventh Reason.

IN the beginning of your Eight Reason you say they grant and confesse That Churches of one constitution ought to withdraw from; and renounce communion and fellowship with a Congregation or Church that is fallen into sinne, as false Doctrine, and evill discipline, &c.

I answer, I have granted you, that in the conclusion of the answer to your 7th. Reason, if the Church stand obstinace in sinne and will not be reclaimed.

But that they should be complained on to Synods and Classes, and subject to their censures, that is but a question of your owne begging, and remaines for you to prove, and denied of me.

The next thing you would know is the diference betweene Excommunication and rejection and would seeme to make them both one.

To which I answer, Titus had power to reject a person,a but we doe not reade that he had power of himselfe to excommunicate that person.

A wicked man may be said to reject God when he rejecteth his Word. So Saul rejected God, (1 Sam. 15. 23. therefore God rejected him from being King, vers. 26. but did he excommunicate God? So the people of Israel rejected God, 1 Sam. 8. 7. and 10. 19. Did they therefore excommunicate God?

Here Mr. Edwards, you may see that Excommunication is more than rejection, as it also plainely appeares by Pauls words, 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. where he delivers unto them the forme of Excommunication, in these words; When ye are gathered together, and my spirit, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, that such a one by the power of our Lord Iesus Christ be delivered unto Sathan, &c. Here Mr. Edwards, you may plainely see the forme of this part of the Lords house; This you see Paul had determined before; and also that Pauls spirit was together with the Church in the action doing; yet Paul tooke not upon him that power of himselfe, but committed the action to the Church who had the power of our Lord Iesus Christ, as he himselfe testifieth, which plainely proves, that the Church had the power that Paul had not; for though Paul was a good Counsellor, yet he was no executioner in that action, but as a member for his part. Here Mr. Edwards you may see the difference betweene rejection and excommunication; a man in rejecting the Law of God may be said to reject God, and he that addes to, or diminisheth from the Lawes of God, rejects God, in rejecting the counsell of God, which injoynes him neither to adde, nor diminish; but you by pleading for your unknowne Synods and ungrounded dependencie, reject the counsell of God: and so doe all those, that assist you in it.

The next thing you affirme as; That this government of Independencie (which I have proved to be Christs government) &illegible; the Communion of Saints.

To which I answer, This appeares to be contrary by that which hath beene said already; as for example, the difference betweene the Church of Antiochia, and the Church of Ierusalem; turned to good, because they undertooke not the authority to determine the case themselves, as hath beene said; because it was against the members of the Church of Ierusalem: and this increased union and communion in both Churches, as we may plainely see, for Peter communicated unto them what God had revealed unto him: and Paul & Bernabas declared what God had done by them. Iames calls from bathe to confidet what Peter had declared; and backes it with the Scripture, manifesting how it agreed with the words of the Prophets, as you may reade at large, in Act. 15. Thus you may see what sweete Communion was betweene these Churches that were both Independant.

Now, whereas you say it cannot be in a Christian Common-wealth, or Nation.

I doe affirme it may stand with Christs Church in a Common-wealth, as may plainely appeare in the three first Chapters of the Revelations, which cestifies that there were seven Churches in Asia, and these seven Churches were compared to seven &illegible; Candlestickes,b and every Candlesticke stood by it &illegible; and held forth her owne light, as appeares by those severall messages, which were sent to those seven Churches for had they had a dependencie one upon another in respect of power, then one message would have served unto them all; and what sinne any of the Churches or Angels were guilty of, would have been said unto the change of all the Churches and Angels; but wee see it was otherwise:Rev. 2. 20. As for instance, there was none charged for suffering the woman Iezebel to teach the people, to commit fornication, and to eate things sacrificed to Idols, but the Angell of Thyatira; by this you may plainely see there was not one Angell set over them all, nor one Synod oppointed to judge and correct them all, which is the thing you labour for. Yet it cannot be said that the Independancie of these seven Churches hindred their communion, either with Christ their head, or one with another; neither was it any disturbance to the Common-wealth or Nation wherein they lived.

And here you cannot say that I have evaded, but have answered you directly to these your doubts, and suppositions, and to many of your Iffs. which have beene your &illegible; out in this Scout; And moreover, I will answer all your many Reasons as I come to them (though they be joyned in battle with these) I meane your following Reasons against Toleration; and also batter, or drive backe your answers which you have made to the Six Reasons, which you say be theirs, and yet neither this Scout, nor the joyned, nor the subjoyned forces, shall be able to discover what strength is on my side, although they be formed by you in battle aray.

Now I have proved the Independant Government to be Christs Government; I will also prove in my Answers to these your following Reasons, that the Independant Congregations performe Christs publike worship, and therefore ought to be tolerated, and maintained in the practise thereof.

IN the beginning of your first Reason against Toleration, you grant, that the Scriptures speake much for Toleration, and bearing with one another in many things, both in matters of opinion and practise, and the Scriptures you quote are very pertinent to this purpose, his alwayes provided, they are to be understood as spoken properly to particular Congregations, and not unto any whole Nation.

But to stand for the Toleration of the maintenance of Heresie, and Schisme, is not the Toleration that we plead for (as farre as hath beene yet made knowne) but rather your insinuation: for I have declared unto you already in the driving backe of the first Scout of your Army. That God hath provided a way and meanes to purge every Congregation of his from all such persons that doe offend, whether it be in matters of Faith or Order. Neither doe any that stand for Christian liberty condemne them for cruelty, or that it is against charitie.

For if we compare the Church with one man or a few then it will easily appeare, that the one doth out-weigh the other: and you say, Calvin saith, It is cruell mercy which preferres one man, or a few, before the Church: To these words of Calvin I doe fully agree unto, for they are of the same nature with my former Answers to your Reasons against Independancie, where I have proved against you, that the weight and power lieth in the Church and that the Church is above the Ministers, and that the Ministers have their power by the Church to exercise in the Church, and not the Church by the Ministers.

The next thing to be considered in this your Reason, is your peremptory affirmation, but grounded upon no Scripture, (namely) That to set up Independant and separated Churches, is a Schisme in it selfe, and that it will make great disturbance in the Church, both to the outward peace, and to the faith and conscience of the people of the Kingdome.

Now that it is a Schisme in it selfe, I deny, and prove the contrary thus;

God hath commanded all his people to separate themselves from all Idolatryc and false worshippingd and false worshiperse (and therefore it is no Schisme) except you will make God the Author of Schisme) & this is according to the Prophet Esaiabs words, Esay 1. which is the first Lesson that every one ought to learne; evento cease to doe evill. But I hope it will not be denied but that they are to learne another lesson, which is, to learne to doe well: but to doe well is to keepe all Gods Commandements, and to obey God rather then men.

Now Gods commands to his people, is, that they learne to know the forme of the house (as I have told you before) and all the Ordinances of the house, and to doe them, Ezek. 43. 11. but the Ordinances of Christs Kingdome under the Gospell, (amongst the rest) are Doctrine, Fellowship, breaking of Bread, and Prayer; which Ordinances the Saints continued stedfastly in, and are commended for their constancie in the same, Acts 2. 42 and that in every particular Church or Congregation, though there were divers in one Nation, and yet I hope you will not affirme it was any disturbance to the Nation (otherwise then Christ hath shewed shall ever be, that the seed of the Serpent, shall persecute the seede of the Woman) for Gods people are said to be a peaceable people and the Lord himself hath said that he hath set them in the world as Lambs among Wolves. Now there must needs be a disagreement betweene Lambes and Wolves but the Lambes are not the cause thereof. By this you may see that Separation is not a Scisme, but obedience to Gods Commandement.

And for any Magistrate to give way for men to separate, from the worship of the Kingdome established by Law (if that worship be not according to Gods Law) is the Magistrates duty; and the Magistrate shall partake of no sinne in so doing because there is no sinne committed. Therefore the Magistrate ought not to forbid the practise of Gods Worship; when hee hath power to command it; for he is set up for the practise of those that doe well, and for the punishment of evill does.

And therefore you did well, when you admonished the Parliament in your Epistle, to cast out of the way all &illegible; blockes, and to breake downe all Images,See the 3. & 4 lease of his Epistle. and Crucifixes; and to throw downe all &illegible; and remove the High places; and to breake to pieces the brazen Serpents which have beene so abused to Idolatry and Superfiction. So then you grant, that much may be done (as it seemeth by your speech) and yet if there be not a full reformation, even to the throwing downe of the High places, it will prove a blemish to the reformers.

Reasons. 1. Pag. 23.You say, be that doth not forbid, when he hath power, he commands.

But I hope you doubt not but the Parliament hath power, and therefore whatsoever they doe not forbid (by your owne ground) they have of doe command.

But in the Protestation, they have not forbidden Gods Worship, which is according to his Word; but they have Protested (and have injoyned others so to doe) to maintaine and defend the Protestant Religion, expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England, against all Popery, and Popish Innovations, within this Realme &c. And in the Interpretation of their meaning of the said Oath, they binde us neither to the setforme of Worship, Discipline, or Government, nor any Rites or Ceremonies of the said Church of England.

Now if we must withstand Popery, and Popish Innovations, then we must needs withstand such dependencie as makes up a whole Nation a Church both good and bad, without separating the precious from the vile, and also such Synods or Counsels that decree, and make Lawes, and impose them upon any Church to keepe, having not the Word of God to warrant them; for these are Popish Innovations, and to be withstood by us, according to our Oath.

And truely Mr. Edwards, you might have asked the independant Ministers a question in private, (for you knew where to finde them) and not have propounded so filly a question before the Parliament, when there was none there to answer you.

Pag. 23.Your Question is, Whether it be fitting, that well meaning Christians should be suffered to goe to make Churches?

To this I Answer, It is fitter for well meaning Christians than for ill-meaning Christians, for well-meaning Christians be the fittest on the earth to make Churches, and to choose their Officers; whether they be Taylors, Felt-makers, Button-makers, Tent-makers, Shepherds, or Ploughmen, or what honest Trade soever, if they are well-meaning Christians; but ill-meaning Priests are very unfit men to make Churches; because what they build up with one hand, they pull downe with the other.

Further you seeme to feare the spreading of Heresies, if there be not a hindrance of these Assemblies.

But you should rather feare that your owne glory would be eclipsed by their gifts and graces; for they are not men of so meane parts as you would make them: but are able to divide the Word of God aright by the spirit that God hath given them. Therefore I would wish you rather to let your heart bleed for your selfe and for the evills that you have done. For Christ will never suffer any to perish for whom he died.

Thus much for your first Reason.

IN your second Reason you say, the Toleration desired will not helpe to heale the Schismes and Rents of your Church.

To which I answer, that if your Church be not the Church of Christ, it will not heale it indeede, for though the Prophets would have healed Babel, it could not be healed.

You say that Ministers and people will not submit to the Reformation and Government setled by Low.

It is very like so, if it be not free from Innovations of Popery, because they are sworne to the contrary.

But you say many doubts will arise in the peoples mindes, that the Government of your Church is not ordered according to the Word of God.

To this I answer; If you meane the Church of Englands Government, established by the Canon Law. I thinke it is out of doubt with the most, for they that understand but little, doe see and know that that Government is vaine and Popish; and that is the reason (as I conceive) why so many refuse to conforme to it: and if you feare that that will prove so great a division, you may doe well to counsell the Magistrates, to expell all such Government, and to reject all such Svnods and Counsells, and to labour to understand the minde of God, and to set up his Government over Beleevers in the Kingdome of England.

And whereas you say, that many of the people who yet be not in this Church way, are possessed with these principles (of the Independant way) and much looking towards it:

I say it is pitty they should any longer be led about by the way of the Wildernesse.

2. You doe affirme, that the mindes of multitudes of Professors in England, and especially in the City of London, are upon all occasions, very apt to fall to any way in Doctrine or discipline, that is not commonly received by the Church.

I answer, Indeede the Proverbe is verified upon them. The burned child dreads the fire; for they have beene so long deceived by your false glosses, that now their eyes being a little open, the light appeareth very sweete unto them; yea, although they see men but like trees, as the blinde man, when his eyes began to be opened, who had beene blinde from his birth.

The third thing which you have laid downe in this Reason, is; That the Ministers will not be tied, from preaching those points in publike, not from speaking of them in private.

To which I answer, I hope they will not indeed, for it were their great sinne, if they should not declare Gods whole Councell, so farre as he hath revealed it unto them.

But if they would (you say) the people both men and women, are so strangely bold and pragmaticall, and so highly conceited of their way as the Kingdome of Christ and the onely way of Christ, that out of those principles, they would be drawing many of their friendship and kindred; and many would (say you) come unto them.

I answer, that this (I hope) you count a vertue, for it is the property of the Sheepe when they fare well, to call their fellowes, But Hogges will not doe so.

The fourth thing to be minded is (that you say) Liberty, the power of government, and rule, to be in the people, are mighty pleasing to flesh and blood, especially in meane persons, and such as have beene kept under.

To which I answer, that they that have beene kept under, have beene kept under by the tyranny of the Man of Sinne; This you confesse to be especially the poore, upon whom those Taskemasters have laid the greatest burthens. Therefore for them to affect liberty is no wonder.

And whereas you say they would have the power and Rule:

I answer, It is not any power or Rule which is pleasing to the flesh (as you speake, thinking them to be like those Priests, Whose god is their belly, whose glory is their shame, who minde earthly things) but it is the power of Christ which they stand for, as they are members of the Churches of Christ; to which Churches Christ the King thereof hath given all power in spirituall things.

And that the Church of Christ consisteth of meane persons, is no wonder; for wee have learned, that the poore receive the Gospell, and you know you have granted, that it stands with the light and Law of Nature, That the liberty, power, and rule, should be in the whole, and not in one man or a few; so that the power must rest in the body; and not in the Officers, though the Church be never so poore.

Now the fifth thing you minde in this Reason is, That Tolleration will be made use of to strengthen their way.

And you also conclude, it will be granted, that the ablest Ministers could not answer them, and therefore were content they should have a Tolleration.

You doe very well to feare the worst, but you had done better if you had armed your selfe against them, and answered the Scriptures, they bring by Scripture: But it is a plaine case, you could not do that, & therfore your feare was just; but if you were a wellminded man, or a wellmeaning Christian man, you should not have feared the comming of the truth to light, nor have been afraid of reformation, because it would worke to your greater divisions, and rents, for Christ came not to set peace upon the earth, (as I have told you before) but the seede of the Serpent will be ever playing his part.

Thus much for your second Reason.

IN your third Reason you affirme, That Tolleration will breed divisions, and Schismes, disturbing the peace and quiet of Churches, and Townes.

I answer, I have told you already, we plead for no tolleration that shall disturbe the peace of Churches or Townes.

Moreover, you say, it will not onely doe so, but it will also breed divisions in families betweene husband and wife, brother, and brother.

To which I answer, There was a division in the first Family that ever was, and brother rose up against brother, but Tolleration was not the cause of it; but the malice of Sathan in the seed of the Serpent, as it hath beene, and is now at this day.

And this is according to Christs words, Luke 12. 52, 53. which saith, That there shall be five in one house, two against three, and three against two, &c. and in Matth. 10. 34. 35. 36. Thinke not (saith he) that I come to send peace into the earth, I came not to send peace, but the sword: For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in Law against her mother in Law, and a mans enemies shall be they of his owne household; and moreover, in Luke 21. 16. our Saviour doth declare, that we shall be betrayed, both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolkes, and friends.

Now if Christ may be said to be the Author of evill, then you may say that Toleration of true Religion is the cause of this division.

Againe you say, (O how) this will occasion disobedience.

To this your Lamentation I answer. O that you would remember the rule* that every servant ought to count his Master worthy of all honour; and in the judgement of charitie beleeve, that persons professing the Gospel will learne that lesson.

Next you say O! how will this take away that power & authority which God hath given to Husbands, Fathers, and Masters, over wives, children, and servants.

To this I answer, O! that you would consider the text in 1 Cor. 7. which plainly declares that the wife may be a beleever, & the husband an unbeleever, but if you have considered this Text. I pray you tell me, what authority this unbeleeving husband hath over the conscience of his beleeving wife; It is true he hath authority over her in bodily and civill respects, but not to be a Lord over her conscience; and the like may be said of fathers and masters, and it is the very same authority which the Soveraigne hath over all his subjects, & therfore it must needes reach to families: for it is granted that the King hath power (according to the Law) over the bodies, goods, and lives of all his subjects; yet it is Christ the King of Kings that reigneth over their consciences: and thus you may see it taketh away no authority which God hath given to them.

The next thing you say is, that they cannot be certaine, that their servants and children sanctifie the Lords day.

To which I answer, that indeede unbeleeving Masters take as little care of this, as they that have given liberty to prophane the Lords Day; but beleeving Parents and Masters, may easily know (if their children or servants be of any Congregation) what their life and conversation is, and therefore this can binder no duties, or workes of Families (as you falsely affirme) nor crosse the good and peace of Familes.

By this you may see, that this your groundlesse affirmation, is no good Reason against Toleration.

And therefore the Court of Parliament (to whom you submit for judgement) may easily see that good members both for Churches and Common-wealths, may issue out of such Families, that live under Christs government, and that such Families may be good Nurseries, both for Church and Common-wealth.

Thus much for your third Reason.

IN your fourth Reason you doe affirme, that there will be great danger of disputes amongst you about Government and Worship, and Doctrine, and practises (in the Conclusion) you say, it will be about a question where Saints goe when they die, whether to heaven or a third place.

I Answer, This is a question I never heard amongst the Separates, (or any of those whom you call Independant men), but amongst the Papists of Rome, and England.

The next thing is, about sitting with hats on to breake bread?

I Answer, this may be a question indeed, but not to breede division; for it may be as lawfull for one man to sit covered & another uncovered, as it may be lawfull for one man to receive it sitting, and another lying in bed. But if any man list to be contentious, the Churches of God have no such custome.

Thus much for your Fourth Reason.

IN your fifth Reason you affirme, that the Ministers of the Kingdome, can have little assurance, of the continuance of their flockes to them, if such a toleration be granted, but that the tolerated Churches will admit them into fellowship, and increase Churches out of their labours: and that they should doe little else but spend and be spent.

To this I answer, that if you were the Ministers of Christ, as you would be taken to be, it might be your comfort, joy, and glory, for it was the Apostles worke to gather the Saints, and to travell in birth of children; and they did not grudge that they were added unto the Churches of Christ, but tooke care for them being so added, for the care of all Churches lay upon them, and therefore they were as Fathers, and Nurses, unto them; and the Gospell admits of no such theft as to steale away members from other Churches: but if men draw neere to the truth (which never were members of any Church) and offer themselves to joyne unto us; we may admit them upon good experience of their life and conversation, for those members that travelled from one Church to another, were commended unto those Churches by Letters from the Church where they were members, or else they could not have beene admitted: and thus you may see the way of the Gospell admits of no such disorder.

Now whereas you say, that this Toleration upon any light occasion of demanding dues; or preaching against any thing they like not, opens a wide doore, and will invite them to disert their Ministers.

I answer, by demanding of that which you call dues; you may indeede give just occasion, for you may demand for due, that which is not due; as all the Priests of England doe. Likewise by preaching of Doctrine, you may give just occasion, if you justifie the wicked, and condemne the just, and make sad the hearts of those whom God would not have made sad; and then if your people slye from you, you may thanke your selves; but concerning what you count to be your due, I will declare hereafter.*

Thus much for your fifth Reason.

NOw in the beginning of your sixth Reason, you say, that liberty will be an undoubted meanes and way of their infinite multiplication and increase, even to thirty fould.

Truely I thinke you are afraid, as Pharaoh was, least the Lords-people should grow mightier then you.

Next you say, if the Parliament could like to have more of the breede of them, and have a delight to have multitudes exempted from the Ecclesiasticall Lawes of the Land, &c.

I answer, it is no disgrace to the Parliament, if they should so delight, though never Parliament before had done the like.

Moreover, you say, they have increased within this nine moneths, without a toleration, therefore (you conclude) they would multiply much, if they had a toleration, in many, if not in most Townes and Parishes, and you say it cannot be helped.

All this I grant may be; although they have not a Toleration, I thinke they will increase; for the Taskemasters can lay no heavier burthens upon them, then they have said already: but though they should increase, it will not be unprofitable, for the increase of beleevers will be the strength and glory of the Kingdome; for they will in all lawfull things, be subject to the Kings Majestie their dread Soveraigne, and to all the wholesome Lawes of his Land, and therefore it will be no danger to have (as you say) swarmes of them.

Thus much for your Sixth Reason.

Pag. 29.IN your 7th. Reason you affirme, that it will be very prejudiciall dengerous and insufferable to this Kingdome, for Saints two, or three, or more, to gather, and combine themselves in Church Fellowship, having one of power from Christ their immediate heade: without expecting warrant from any Governors.

First, whereas you say it will be prejudiciall:

I answer, It can prejudice none in the Kingdome, except it be the Priests, and it will be but of a little tithes, which they dare not in conscience pay, because those Iewish Ceremonies are ceased, and if they have not Toleration, that will be all one (in that respect,) for they will rather suffer, then doe any thing against conscience.

Now whereas you say it will be dangerous, and insufferable to the Kingdome, both these I deny; for if they were offensive people, two or three or a few could doe but little hurt. But they have beene proved to be a peaccable people and the suffering of such hath never beene dangerous to any Nation, but the not suffering of such to live quietly in a Land, or to passe quietly thorow a land, hath brought Judgements upon such Lands.

Now whereas you seeme to imply, that they should aske leave of the Magistrate, to gather and combine themselves into visible Churches, &c.

I answer, I doe not reade that any ever asked leave of the Magistrate for such a thing; nor to performe any of the parts of Gods Worship or Discipline: and yet you confesse that these independant men doe petition, to the Parliament for liberty.* Now I pray you Master Edwards, would you have Magistrates, and Kings, and Princes to have more power over their subjects then over their bodies, estates, and lives? would you have them be Lords over their consciences? I pray you where must Christ reigne then? Must he sit at the Magistrats footestoole? and take what power the Magistrate will give him? (I meane spirituall power of gathering and making Churches) and such Lawes as the Magistrate will give him leave to have, to rule over them by? Here you thrust Christ into a narrow corner; for you would faine force him to give his glory to some other, and his praise to some graven Image, of your owne devising, which he hath said he will not doe.*

But me thinkes it were fitter for men of your coate, to ground the Government of Christs Church, upon the written Word of God, and not upon Statute Lawes, nor Canon Lawes, which you call Ecclesiasticall; for it will be no disparagement to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme, for Christs Church to be governed by Christs owne Lawes.

The next thing is, you say,Pag. 30. lin. 30. 31. the Oath of Supremacie was appointed by Law for Ecclesiasticall persons to take.

Me thinkes that was a good consideration, for Ecclesiasticall persons have beene in all ages ready to tyrannize, over Kings and Emperours.

But now you aske the independant men (as you call them) a question; but before you come to the question, you lay downe an affirmation or a conclusion: (namely) That these, independant men give power to the Churches.

To which I answer; If they should doe so, they were very ignorant, and very presumptuous, for Christ hath given power to the Churches, and all the Ministers that doe administer in the Churches, must have the power by the Church.

But say you, they give that power to the Churches, which the Papists give unto the Pope.

I answer, if they doe so they are blasphemers for the Papists acknowledge the Pope to be the head of the Church: which title all men ought to give onely unto Christ.

But now to your question; which is, whether they will take the Oath of Supremacie, or doe acknowledge in their prayers, The King Defender of the Faith? &c.

To which I answer, This Ooth you say, was ordained for Ecclesiasticall persons, and I hope these Ecclesiasticall independant men (if I may safely so call them) will ever, both acknowledge, and maintaine, that the King is supreme over all the Land, therefore over the Church of the Land, though it consist of the Clergie, as it appeares by that Oath which you say was appointed for the Clergie.

But whether they doe acknowledge the King, defender of the Faith, &c. which is the later part of your Question?

To this I answer. It is out of all doubt, that these men doe desire from their heart, (as well as all the Lords people) that the King may defend the Faith of Christ Jesus, and dayly make their prayers and supplications to God for him, and that in conscience, and obedience to God, being commanded in his Word so to doe, for they know it is a duty laid upon them; for prayers and supplications must be made for Kings, and all them that be in authoritie;b but &illegible; can make axceptable prayers, but the Saints, for the prayers of the wicked are abomination unto the Lordc But that all Kings have beene defenders of the Faith of Christ, I deny; for there is but one Faith,* and those that do maintaine that true faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, lawfully have that title given them; and none other may lawfully have it but they.

You will happily say, Queene Mary was not a Defender of the Faith. But I say unto you, if the Crowne of England give unto Kings and Queenes that title; Queene Mary had as much right to the title as Queene Elizabeth. &c.

Pag. 31. lin. 30.Secondly, you say, they hold that the imposition of lawfull things, doth make them unlawfull, (which you say is a strange paradoxe.)

I answer the imposition of lawfull things doe not make them unlawfull, if he that imposeth them have authoritie so to doe: as for example; the imposition of an Oath is very lawfull; but if it be imposed by him that hath not authoritie, though it make not the Oath unlawfull simply in it selfe, yet it makes the use of it unlawfull, at that time, both to him and to me.

But as for formes of prayer: which (you say) they doe confesse to be for order, and lawfull in themselves, yet unlawfull, being imposed.

I say, not as you say, they say, for I know no forme of prayer lawfull in it selfe, for any of the Lords people to tie themselves unto; nor that ever was imposed upon any by Christ, or his Apostles; (We reade in 1 Tim. 2. 1. 2. that all manner of prayers must be made unto God; and amongst other, supplications must be made for Kings, but there was no forme of words given by which wee must pray for any: and we are commanded to pray with the Spirit, and to pray with understanding;) but we are commanded to avoid an evill manner of praying; that we should not be like the Hipocrites; which love to stand and pray in the Synogogues,* nor that we should make vaine repititions as the Heathens, which thinke to be heard for their much babling:* and as also we are forbidden an evill manner of praying; so wee are commanded by God what manner to use, as it is plaine in Matth. 6. 9.

The manner is that wee must in our prayers acknowledge God to be our Father.Matth. 6. 9.

And secondly, That he is in heaven.

Thirdly, we must give glory to his Name.

Fourthly, we must pray for the coming of his Kingdome.

Fiftly, we must pray that the Lords Will may be done,Ver. 10. both in earth and in heaven.

Sixthly, wee must pray for all things necessary for this life,Ver. 11. which is there set forth under the name of dayly bread.

Seventhly,Ver. 12. wee must pray for the forgivenesse of our owne sinnes; and we are also put in minde, that as wee would have our owne sinnes forgiven, so we should forgive others; if they acknowledge their offences, according to that in Luke 17. 4, If thy brother trespasse against thee seven times a day, and seven times a day, and say it repenteth him, &c.

Eightly,Ver. 13. we must pray against temptations to be delivered from the evills thereof.

And lastly, we must conclude with thankesgiving acknowledging the Kingdome to be the Lords and all power, and glory to be due unto him, not onely for that present time, but for ever.

Here you may see we are taught the manner how we ought to pray, but we are tied to no forme of words, yet we are to beleeve that this is a perfect Rule, and that we may sufficiently ground all the petitions we neede to put up from this very rule.

As for Example.

As we desire to acknowledge God to be our Father, so wee ought to desire, that others would doe the like.

And whereas we ought to pray for the Kingdome of God to come, we are not to limit it to this, (that Christ may come to rule in us onely) but that he may rule as a King in the heart of all his chosen.

Neither ought wee alone to acknowledge praises but wee ought to desire that prayses to God may be acknowledged by others also, and that they may grant the Kingdome, and power, and glory to be his, not that he should be a King onely to rule in the hearts of men, but also that he may rule and governe the actions of the bodies of men in his outward worship: as we are commanded to glorifie God with our bodies and soules, and the reason, is because they are his, 1 Cor. 6. 20. Now, if our bodies and soules be Gods, then it must needs be granted, that it is in spirituall worship: for in all civill things it hath beene acknowledged already, that both bodies and lives are our soveraigne Lord the Kings; in whose Land we dwell.

Now if there were any forme of prayer for men to bind themselves unto, it would have beene shewed, either in this Scripture, or in some other; which thing you have not yet proved.

That they were not tied to this forme of words is plaine by another Evangelist, which doth not use the same words, but addeth some, and leaveth out other some; and also the whole forme of thankesgiving, is left out by Luke, (Luke 11. 2. 3. 4. Compared with Matth. 6. 9.) and to seeke the helpe of any booke but the Bible to teach men to pray, is to disable God which hath promised to give Beleevers his Spirit, whereby they shall cry Abba Father,c and that that Spirit should leade them into all truth, and bring all things to their remembranced Therefore a forme of prayer for men to tie themselves unto, cannot be sufficient and pleasing to God though it were never imposed by any.

Thirdly, you lay another slander upon us, as though we should affirme, that Christian Princes, and Magistrates, who are defenders of the Faith have no more to doe in and about the Church, then Heathen Princes.

This is not true, for we know that Christian Princes, and Magistrates ought to be members of Christs Church; and so being they may be Officers in the Church; And if they be Defenders of the Faith, they be such as defend the pure worship of God, manifested in his Word, as also the true professors thereof, and that against all tyrannicall power that shall attempt to suppresse either it or them, as the good Kings of Judah and Israel did, by slaying the Servants and Prophets of Baal who had slaine the Lords people.

But Heathen Kings cannot be said to be members of the Church of Christ before they know Christ, and then they become Christian Kings. Therefore, to vent upon all occasions, such principles as you see wee hold, and maintaine, is not (as you say) dangerous and insufferable, neither are the people.

But you say further, that the people for a great part of them are heady and refractory, and proud, and bitter, and scornfull, and dispisers of authoritie, and that they will not suffer publike prayer; to be prayed, but that by their gesture and threatning of the Ministers, they have laboured to binder the use of them: And these people (I gather from your owne words) are the professors in England, and especially in the city of London; and it is very like to be so; because they were there at the time of your service; (for neither the Separates nor Semiseparates (as you call them) use to be there at the time of your service (for ought I know:) and these Professors you have also called Idle, & busibodies, tatlers also, as it is said, 1 Tim. 5. 13. very wanton in their wits (say you) affecting novelties in Religion, and liking of points that are not established nor commonly held, and these you say are many of the professors* And in your second Reason against Toleration, Pag. 24. (you say) that the mindes of multitudes of the Professors in England, and especially in this citie, are upon all occasions very apt to fall to any way in Doctrine or Discipline that is not commonly received by the Church, &c. But I tel you, you ought not to blame any for withstanding any thing in Gods worship, which is not grounded in his Word: Neither (if the whole body of the worship there tendred be the invention of man) ought any of them to be blamed for opposing such a worship; because it is according to their Protestation.

Yet I justifie none that will oppose disorderly, as either by casting up of hats, or threatning the Minister, or any the like unseemely behaviour; for I judge it better for them to depart in peace, if they have not faith in the action performed.

But methinkes (Mr. Edwards) you have soulely missed it, in that you have thus vilified your brethren, to call them by the names of those mockers which (Paul testified) should come in the last time, that should be heady, and high minded, and proud boasters, and despisers of authority; for such as these have not the power of godlinesse, (and by this you make your Church a soule Church, and defile shrewdly your owne nest, and make it appeare to all men that you live in a Cage of uncleane birds) & therefore you are commanded from such to turne aside;* if the feare of God be in your heart.

Moreover, You say, you feare they will not tolerate the Government established by the Ecclesiasticall, and civill Lawes; and you would faine father the cause of this your feare upon Separates, and Independancie, whereas you cannot be so ignorant, but that you must know, that the government established by Law may stand without the leave of Separates, for they have neither power to give toleration, nor to prohibit toleration, for, or against any thing.

But you say, you would rather pray against toleration, than prophesie of the wofull esse is of it.

I answer, if you can make such a prayer in a time acceptable, then sometimes such prayers will be accepted which are not grounded upon Gods Word.

But of the wofullest effects of toleration, you have prophesied already; in that you say, they will withstand your Doctrine and your dues,* and that will be a wofull effect indeede! when you shall be driven, to cry out, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, for in one boure is so great wealth come to desolation.

Thus much for your Seventh Reason.

IN your Eight Reason, you affirme, That these Independant men, where they have power, as in New-England, will not tolerate any Churches or Government, but in their owne way.

In using the word these, you carry the matter so darkely, that I know not whom you meane, for you have named none.

But you seeme to say, they be men that have power in New England.

I answer, Indeede it may happen to be so; That there may be some men there, that take upon them authority, to binde mens consciences, as you and all your fellowes do here. But if it have beene so, I thinke it was, because they had (here in England) taken upon them an oath of conformity, (as you have sometimes done;) and because the tyranny of the Prelats was so mighty, against all good men, that they were faine to go away privately, and so had not time or opportunity publikely to disclaime this their Oath; and then there might be feare, that upon complaint made for disorder committed there, in suffering the liberty of the Gospel there which could not be admitted here, they might have beene sent for backe by their Ordinaries, and so have been committed, to some stincking prison, here in London, there to have beene murdered, as divers of the Lords people have beene, of these late yeares, as I am able to prove of my owne knowledge; and if they have banished any out of their Parents, that were neither disturbers of the peace, of the Land, nor the worship practised in the Land, I am perswaded, it was their weakenesse, and I hope they will never attempt to doe the like. But I am still perswaded, they did it upon the same ground, that having knowledge in themselves, that their former Oath, might be a snare unto them, if they did not hold still some correspondencie with the practise of England, even till God should open a way or meanes for them to seeke free liberty for all, by the approbation of authority.

The next thing you minde against them is, that they would not admit liberty, to some of their brethren, which were godly Ministers, though they did approve of them, as being against Ceremonies.

To this, 1. I answer, that it is strange that any man should send to aske their liberty. 2. It is much more strange to me (if it be true, as you say, that these men were against Ceremonies) that there should be any difference betweene them, and the Ministers in New England.

But it seemes (by your speech) they would have gone in a middle way, which presupposeth to me, that they are so farre from being against Ceremonies, that are already invented, that they would have set up some invention of their owne.

The next thing you charge some of them with, is, That they would not admit into fellowship, those that would not enter into their Covenant, and professe faith, and submit to their Church Orders, though they would be of their Church.

Me thinkes you have strange evasions, but I pray you answer me to these two questions: the first is, how men of yeares of discretion, may (by the rule of Gods Word) be admitted into fellowship, and not professe their faith.

Secondly, how men may be accounted, to be of the Church, and not submit unto the orders of the Church: Seeing that the Apostle Paul had these two things to rejoyce in; the beholding of the Saints stedfast faith, and comely order, in the Church.

But you say, that these men would faine have a toleration in this great kingdome, will not allow any in their small particular Congregations.

Truely (Mr. Edwards) It were good for you to labour to understand the minde and will of God for your selfe, and have charitie towards your brethren; and hope well, that they have so much knowledge, of the Lords will, that they will not pleade for such an absurdity, as to set up one Church, within another, and so make a schisme. But the Toleration they plead for, is that Gods true worship, may be set up in the Kingdome by those that understand what it is; and that by the sufferance of the Governors; and that it should be setled in a peaceable way; which would be farre from disturbing the peace of three Kingdomes, (as you invectively speake;) but to set up a Congregation in a Congregation, would be confusion, even as to set up one Kingdome within another.

The next thing you charge them with, is, that they are partiall; (by a supposition of your owne:) for you say, it is ordinary for men, when they are not in place, nor have no power in Church or Common-wealth; and hold also Doctrines and principles contrary to what is held and established; to pleade for Toleration; but when the same men come to have place and power (say you) they will not tolerate others; and you say, that you doe beleeve that these are the men, which now indevour a toleration.

To this I answer, you may doe well to let this beleefe of yours be no Article of your faith, because it stands upon no ground; for though a man may hope the best, and feare the worst; yet he may beleeve nothing but what he hath proofe for. But I doe beleeve that all this is your evill surmising, (to think, that if they had power in their hands to settle a Government, they would tolerate none but their independant way,) as it may plainely appeare by the Protestation Protested, which you quote here for your Author, for though the Protestor declare what he would have for the Churches of the Saints; yet he doth not take upon him to determine, what Government or rule, shall be set up in the Land, to bring men out of darkenesse to light, but leaveth that to the judgement of them which have the power, even the King and Parliament.

Thus much for your Eight Reason.

IN your ninth Reason you affirme, that toleration may be demanded, upon the same grounds, for Brownists, Anabaptists, and Familists, and others, who professe it is their conscience.

To which I answer; That seeing you plead for them, I may well hold my peace. But I thinke the Familists will not aske liberty for toleration if they be as (I doe conceive) of the Sect of the Libertines mention in the Acts.

But, say you, these may be pleaded for upon better grounds then Semi-Separates, and the Reason you say is, because they deny the truth of your Church.

Answer, I do beleeve, those (whom you call Semi-Separates) do deny the truth of your Church also; (though not in all respects,) and so farre as they be Separates, they must needs deny the Church from which they Separate.

But you here demand, whether Papists may not petition and have hope: for toleration, seeing it is their conscience.

To this I answer, I know no reason why they may not petition and hope to speede also, seeing they have many friends in the Kingdome.

Further, you adde, that if one sort may have an exemption from the Religion established, why not others?

I answer, There may be many reasons given, why those may not have freedome (of any great resorts in the Land) which have often attempted, by plots, and treachery to ruinate the Land.

The next thing you affirme, is, if ever the doore of toleration, should be but a little opened, there would be great crowding in.

To this I answer, That the more good men doe imbrace the whole truth of God, the better it will be, but there have beene too many crowders and creepers in in all ages; and we may justly seare it will be so still; for the Text saith, in the 2 Pet. 2. 2. That many shall follow their destruction, and some of them shall doe it through &illegible; who shall with fained words make merchandise of the Lords people (as is plaine in the next verse) whose destruction sleepeth not. But who these creepers in be, appeares by the 15. verse of this Chapter, That they were they that loved the wages of unrighteousnesse as Balaam did: But if any one so doe, his last end shall be worse then his beginning.

Thus much for your ninth Reason.

IN your Tenth Reason, you affirme, That the first principle of the Independant way, is, That two or three Saints wheresoever, or by what meanes soever they doe arise; separating themselves from the world into the fellowship of the Gospell, are a Church truely gathered: for this you quit? Mr. Robinsons Iustification, pag. 221.

But in that page there is no such thing written, as I can finde, but seeing it commeth so neere the truth, we neede not to contend about it. For I doe affirme, that a company of Saints, Separated from the world, and gathered into the fellowship of the Gospell (by what meanes so ever it be, that matters not, so it be by the teaching of the Sonne of God, according to that in Heb. 1. 1.) these Saints (I say) separating themselves, and being gathered into the fellowship of the Gospell (though they combine themselves without the warrant of the Governours) are a true Church, and have right to all Gods Ordinances,Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Rev. 21. 27. and 22, 14, 15. not onely to admit men into fellowship, but also to admonish, to reprove and to cast out of their societie all obstinate offenders amongst them that doe transgresse, either against the first or second Table; having (as hath beene said before) the Spirit of God to guide them, and wisedome from above to judge of persons, and causes, within the Church, though they have nothing to doe to judge those that are without.

And this doth not make way for Libertisnime, for Heresies and Sectaries (as you say) neither doth it make men to runne from their owne Ministers, because they restraine them from sinne, or keepe them to Gods Ordinances, (as you doe affirme) for if any separate for any such cause, they shall not be received into fellowship, nor justified of any of the Lords people.

But the way of the Gospell, as hath beene plainely proved, is not to live without Gods Ordinances, nor to live at liberty (as you say) except you meane the liberty wherein Christ hath set them, and commanded them to stand fast, because he hath made them free, Gal. 5. 1. By this you may see the Saints are called into liberty; but not a liberty to sinne (as you would insinuate) but to be freed from the yoake of bondage, which is the tyranny, or tyrannicall government of the Canon Lawes, either of Rome or England.

But you say, all heretickes, Sectaries, or libertines will count themselves Saints, as well as the Independant men; and the reason you seeme to give for this, is, because the Ministers, and Magistrats of the Kingdome, shall not have power to determine who be Saints.*

Now let all men judge what a weighty argument this is, who is he that knows any thing, & knows not this, that the Priests in England which are the Bishops creatures, do generally justifie the wicked, and condemne the just, and are not these meet men to judge Saints? they justifie none that will not be conformable, and yeeld unto the traditions which they have invented, in their Councels and Convocations; though they have not one title of Gods Word to warrant them; Furthermore, they condemne all that will not submit, to their devised worship, even in all the traditions thereof: and this is the dependancie which they have brought all men unto, both high and low, even to be subject to their wills, which is a Law.

But now touching the Magistrate, you would seeme to inferre that he should have no more power than a Priest.

It is plaine, the Priests have no power, but what they have by permission, and sufferance, though they have dependancie upon the Pope himselfe, but the Magistrate hath power given him of God, by whom he is set up, for the praise of those that doe well, and for the punishment of evill doers, and hath the same rule given him (whereby to judge them) that God hath given to his Church; especially Christian Magistrates, notwithstanding they are opposed, yet they have power given of God; as you may reade in Acts 7 35. This man Moses whom they for sooke saying, who make thee a Prince and a Iudge, the same God sent for a Prince and a deliverer: and this is he which was as a God unto Aaron; when Aaron was as the mouth of Moses to the people, Exod. 4. 16. Now if you Priests could have proved your selves as Aaron, then you might have beene assistants to Godly Magistrates to deliver the Lords people out of the hands of Tyrannicall Princes; but contrariwise, you adde afflictions as Pharaohs Taskemasters did;Exod. 5. 19. even you (Mr. Edwards) when you say the Lords people are wanton-witted and idle, when they desire to have liberty to serve God.

And thus you sit in the consciences of men; judging zeale to be hypocrisie; but the time will come, when every worke shall be brought to judgement.

And now drawing neere to an end of this Answer to your tenth Reason (which is the last of this your joyned army) it is good to looke backe a little, and consider what hath beene said.

You have spoken much for Dependencie; but upon whom you doe depend, I cannot tell;

You labour to bring men into doubts, by your suppositions, but you doe not make any conclusion, which is Gods way, that men fearing God, may expect a blessing when they walke in it, but you cry out for Dependencie, upon Councels, and Synods, and Churches; I pray you what Dependencie hath the Church of England upon any other Church? for I suppose you will say, that all the Land is but one Church.

If you say, that you have Dependencie, upon the Church of Rome; I doe beleeve you; for the Bishop of Canterbury hath said so much, in his booke, where hee confesseth, Rome to be as leprous Naaman, and England to be the same Naaman cleansed.

Now that it is the same, may easily be proved, by divers of your owne Authors. But you in your Epistle, affirme, it is not cleansed, in that place, where you say, that there is yet Altars and Images, brasen Serpents, abused to Idolatry, with divers other things, which you would have purged out.

By this it appeares, that it is the same with Rome, in the very nature of it, though not in every Circumstance, and this (for any thing can be discerned) is the Dependancie, for which you pleade: even the Dependancie and affinitie, betweene Rome and England.

Therefore you should rather have said, That in the belly of this Dependancie, doth lurke all liberty, and heresie, and whatsoever, Sathan, and the corrupt hearts of men have a pleasure to broach. For in that way, it is too common for men to broach their owne pleasures; for their Religion is made of mens inventions.

Thus much for your 10th. Reason.

YEt furthermore, (for addition to these ten Reasons, you adde a Question;* your Qeustion is, what these men would have in this Toleration, Whether the number of five or sixe Congregations onely, and no more? Or whether the number shall be left undetermined, and be free to multiply? &c.

For answer to this, I doe affirme, that the number ought not to be limitted, for the Churches of the New Testament were free, to multiply, not onely in greatnesse, but also in number. I say they were left free by God; for the Apostles were not limitted, from constituting Churches wheresoever men were brought to beleeve in Christ.

But say you, it is their principles to breake one Church in two or three.

I answer, I know no man that holdeth any such principle.

But say you, it hath beene so at Amsterdam, Roterdam, and London.

To this I answer, I deny not, but that there may be offences taken, and sometimes given, which may cause men to depart one from another (as Paul and Barnabas did) sometimes about persons, and sometimes about things; and wofull experience teacheth all men, that brethren are apt to fall out by the way; and that Ioseph knew very well, when he admonished his brethren to the contrary.* But though some should be offended, and could not be reconciled, (as the Scripture saith, a brother offended, is harder to be wonne than a strong citie*) yet the departing of such a brother, (or brethren) cannot make that Church two Churches, yet notwithstanding this may sometimes tend to the further spreading of the Gospell even as the departing of Paul and Barnabas did. Not that I justifie the practise of any that are not apt to beare, but that God doth sometimes, bring good out of evill, (as it was in the selling of Ioseph,* by turning it to his owne glory, and the good and comfort of his people.

Therefore you neede not to marvell, which shall be the state approved by the Magistrate; because that properly, there remaineth but one intire state, (in such cases of division, as you have before mentioned.) By all this it appeares that it is none of our principles to breake one Church into two or three.

But you say, if the number be left undetermined, there may be many Churches in a Towne.

For answer whereof. I must tell you, that I reade in the Scriptures of no more Churches in a towne, but one, as in Ierusalem where there were many Converts, yet I reade but of one Church.

Now this was in the first plantation of the Gospell, but what they might increase to afterward, the Scripture is silent in, for any thing I know.

But that there may be two or three in one place (as you say) that seemeth unto me to be confusion, except they should meete in one place for consultation, which may very well be, for God is the God of Order and not of confusion.

And I never reade in the Scripture, that two Churches met together in one place, for the practise of publike worship.

But say you; we may have, every where, three or foure men; of an opinion differing from others, to goe to make a Church.

To this I answer, If you meane (by every where) in every Towne of the Land, I say, although it should be so, (and though there be sixe townes in a Parish) yet it will be no no confusion; for the fewer they are together the lesse ground will there be of fearing them.

But touching divisions and subdivisions.

If any such thing happen, it is but that which we have bin told on before. The Apostles words are these, They went out from us, because they were not of us, &c.* and if evill minded men, that crept in departed from Christ,* we neede not to thinke much, that such creepers in, should depard from us also; yet the disorderly going away of any (as I have said before) doth not make them a Church which goe away disorderly.

And thus I have given you an answer to your second tenth Reason,* for in your Booke you have by your stile made it a Reason, though you seemed at the first entrance into it to make it but a question.

But before you conclude the whole, you subjoyne to these, the Answer to five or sixe things (which you would make to be their reasons) and you say that they are continually alleadged, by them for their toleration, in this Kingdome.

THe first Reason (you say they bring) is, that toleration is no more then the French, and Dutch enjoy, who live among us.

Indeede that is a very good reason, for methinkes it stands with equitie, that Natives borne, should have as much priviledge as Strangers.

But you would seeme to alter the state of the case, in sixe respects.

First, That the French and Dutch Protestants have nothing, nor desire nothing, as contra distinct to the Protestants of France and Holland.

I answer, if the Protestants of France, and Holland, have liberty of their conscience, and be not at all burdened, with Iewish, Popish, or Heathenish Observations, but may be free there, to worship God, according to his Will, revealed in his Word, then they that are here (amongst us) neede not to seeke more liberty, and I am sure the Independant men will aske no more.

Secondly, you say, that this liberty, was granted, by our Pious Princes, in the times of persecution to the Protestants.

Here you crosse your first respect, for if these Protestants were persecuted in France, then it is certaine their Religion was different, from the state of their owne Nation; for you say they could not enjoy their Religion at home.

Furthermore you adde, that it hath beene kept ever since, for a refuge to the persecuted Protestants.

To which I answer, The very like may be said of the libertie granted to the English Church in Amsterdame, which hath beene a refuge for the Protestants which have beene persecuted out of England ever since.

But (you say) we may enjoy our Religion in this Land, and that by the authority of the King and Parliament.

If it be so: I pray you what is the meaning, of the bleating of such cattell, as your selfe? which cry out dayly to the King and Parliament, for the suppression of the Lords people; and for the hindring of their meetings.

Thirdly, you say, The French and Dutch Churches will willingly be joyned in Government, and in one way of discipline with the Kingdome, if there be a Reformation.

Indeede if you had not added a great If, here you had told a loud untruth, but if this were performed, that there were a Reformation, according to Gods Will, I doubt not but the Independant men would doe the like.

Fourthly, you say these Churches doe not hold our principles, but doe admit of appeales in great businesses.

I answer, I have told you already, and I now tell you againe, that I admit of appeales also, such as the Scripture warrants, and I have declared at large what appeales they be.*

Fifthly, you say, they be strangers different in Language, and have little acquaintance with you (keeping themselves for the most part among themselves) and therefore (say you) there will be the lesse danger of drawing away the people.

I answer, if they differ so little from you, as you would make the world beleeve, there were small cause of danger, or Schisme, if they will willingly be joyned (as you said before) in Government, and in one way of discipline with the Kingdome.

Further, you adde, that they vent no principles, against your Church, and Government.

I answer, Indeede, if they should never open a mouth to speake, yet their practise makes them different from you, both in worship and government; and yet it may be upon better considerations, they may draw neerer to the rule hereafter; but for my part I leave them, as being partly ignorant of their practise.

But you say, they will not admit your people to be members of their Congregations.

Answer, Indeede I doe not know that ever they have refused any; but this much I know; that some English people, that have the French, and Dutch tongue, have, and doe goe thither to heare; but that any should desire to goe thither to heare, that have not the language, were very absurd.

Sixthly, There, is (say you) a great reason, and necessity, of allowing them Churches and places to preach, and be by themselves, and the reasons you yeeld, are (1) because many of them understand not English at all, and (2) for the benefit of strangers of their owne Religion.

To which I answer, The very same may be said concerning the English Churches in Holland.

But further you adde, that they may well be allowed some Discipline among themselves, in respect they maintaine all their owne poore.

Methinks (Mr. Edwards) there should be much more reason, that the English Protestants, or Separates, should be tolerated, for the same cause, for they maintaine all their owne poore also. And furthermore, they maintaine the poore of the Church of England; yea, in every parish where their dwelling houses stand, they pay to the poore weekely, as well as any other man.

They also pay their money for the maintenance of the Visited Houses in the Parishes where they dwell.

Nay, furthermore, they pay also their mony for the maintenance of the Priests of England, (the more is the pitty) and so I feare the Dutch and French doe also, yea though the Priests are as Popish as they were in Queene Maries time. And this is well knowne to all Landlords that doe let them houses, for if they know them to be Separates, and that they will not, have to doe with the Priests in the pay ment of that they call dues, they make their Tenant pay the more rent, for if the Tenant will not the Landlord must. And by this you may see, their burthens are double to other mens; in that they must maintaine their owne poore and their owne Ministers, and the Church of Englands also.

And by this you may see, that you have not (in the least) altered the state of the case, betweene the Dutch, and French, and us, in the causes before mentioned.

Therefore this their first reason for toleration lies yet unanswered by you.

FOr answer to their second Reason, which (you say) is that they seeke no more then is granted them, in Holland; your answer to it is this,

That if that be a good ground, then Jewes and Anabaptists may have a toleration also.

To this I answer, For my part I speake for my selfe, and I suppose, that they may say as much for themselves (in these late respects, which you have mentioned) as the Separates doe, for they maintaine their poore, and their Ministers, and the poore, and the Priests of the Church of England, as well as we. And I thinke they are persecuted and hunted also; but I will leave them to pleade for themselves.

Further, you adde, That such a Toleration is not fit, neither in Divinity, nor in policie.

I answer, I know no true Divinitie that teacheth men to be Lords over the conscience; and I thinke it is no part of Godly policie, to drive the Kings subjects out of the land, because they desire free liberty to worship God in the Land according to his will; the States of Holland are counted politicke, and yet they esteeme it the Strength of their Kingdome, to grant free libertie of conscience.

Secondly, you say, there may be a toleration for us in Holland, with much more safety to the government established, then can be here, because the people understand not our language; and also have little, or no relation to us of kindred and friendship, &c.

I answer, I must say to you, as I have said already, that there was never any danger to a Kingdome, to suffer the Lords people to live quietly, and enjoy their liberty.

Thirdly, you say, The people of the Holenders are generally industrious, and mind their businesse, and keeping to what is established by their Lawes, not troubling their heads so much with other points of Religion.

By this one may easily perceive your minde (Mr. Edwards) with the rest of your fellowes, and also know, that you are naturally derived from Rome, in that you would have all men, to content themselves, with an implicit faith; and to take for granted, what government your Lawes alloweth, and what worship your inventions have hatcht; and not to search the the Scripture at all.

Further you add here, that the people in England are not so, especially in this city of London and great Townes, you say many of the professors, are more idle, and busie bodies, tatlers also, as it is said, 1 Tim. 5. 13. very wanton also in their wits, affecting novelties in Religion, &c.

Now truly (Mr. Edwards) if you were of my mind, and were a member of such a Church, that had such members in it; you woulde be so farre from fearing, of being beguilded of them, that you would be very glad to have such birds taken out of your nest. But you are so farre from observing the rule of Christ (Matth. 18. 15.) that is to tell your brother of his fault betweene him and you that you rather walke with slanders and elamours, vilifying your owne mothers sonnes; so that every good man may be ashamed of you.

Fourthly, you say, that Holland tolerates us and many others, but it is more upon grounds and necessitie of worldly respects, because of the benifite of exsise towards the maintenance of warre.

Now (Mr. Edwards) you have utterly overthrowne your owne Argument, laid downe in the beginning of your answer to this their second Reason, for then you said, it was against the rule of policie; but now you say it is their policie.

And whereas you would make the case different betweene England and Holland.

I answer, It is not different at all; for England hath the Subjects purses to maintaine warres as well as Holland; and though it be not in exsise for victuals, yet it is in some other wayes from which the subjects of Holland are freed.

The next thing you affirme, is; That your riches and strength, standeth in one way of Religion.

To which I answer, I thinke (if I could understand your minde herein) you meane the riches and strength of the Priests: for I am sure the riches, and strength of the Kingdome, may stand best with Toleration, as it may appeare, partly by what hath been said already, for you have heard that the Lords people (whom you thus persecute) maintaine their owne poore.

And it will also be made appeare, that they pay Scot, and Lot, in the Kingdome, in all civill respects, and are all as true subjects to the Kings Majesty, and are ready to doe him all faithfull service with their bodies, and estates, as any in the Kingdome.

But I confesse that toleration would be neither riches nor strength to the Priests, for it is fore against the peoples will, that they pay them any thing now; and it will be no wonder when it shall be made to appeare, what the Priests wages is,* but that shall be done hereafter.

THeir third Reason you say is, That if they have not liberty to erect some Congregations, it will force them to leave the Kingdome.

For answer whereof, you doe affirme (in the first place) that there is no neede of a toleration for them; neither that they should leave the Kingdome for conference, and that you say will appeare by the Reasons and principles which they doe agree to, which you say are these;

First, that they hold your Churches true, your Ministers true, Ordinances true: Further you say they can partake with you in your Congregations in all Ordinances, even to the Lords Supper.

To which I answer, Indeede here you would make the Readers beleeve, that they had opened a wide gappe, (if they should take your affirmation, without your provisall) but you come to helpe your selfe handsomely, in that you say their condition was, that it must first be provided, that scandalous and ignorant persons must be kept backe, and Ceremonies must be removed.

Methinks, this is a mighty great mountaine, that stands between them and you, and therefore you have small cause, to aske them wherefore they should desire, to set up Churches? for till this mountaine be removed, they may be true to their own principles, and not go from their word, and yet never communicate with you, either in worship, or government.

For first, If you keepe out all scandalous persons, out of all the Churches in England, from the Sacraments, and all ignorant persons; truely then your Churches will be as emptie as ours.

Secondly, If you should remove away all your Ceremonies, (which is the second part of your reformation,) you could not tell how to worship; for your whole forme and manner of worship is made of invented Ceremonies.

But if you can procure such a reformation, to have your Church all consist of persons of knowledge, fearing God, and hating covetousnesse, & void of all other scandalls (so far as we can judge by the Scripture) and that the Ceremonies may be removed, and we enjoy (as you bragge) all Gods Ordinances with you, as well as in our owne Churches, then you shall heare, what I will say to you, as well as the Independant men.

But till all this be done, you see there is still good reason, for good men, either to desire liberty, or to leave the Kingdome.

Further, you say, some of them could take the charge of Parochiall Churches amongst you, upon the Reformation.

I Answer, Indeede such a Reformation, which you have formerly mentioned, will hardly stand with Parochiall Churches.

But you say, they could yeeld to Presbyteriall Government, by Classes and Synods; so they might not be injoyned to submit to it, as Jure Divino.

To which I answer. It seemes (by your owne confession) that they doe deny the Presbyteriall government by Classes, and Synods, to be from God, as it appeares, in that you say, they will not submit to it, as Iure Divino, and therefore you have overthrowne your selfe (in all this your reasoning) with your Synods and Classes also; so that still there remaines good grounds to seeke a Toleration, that the Saints may grow into bodies even in this Land.

But to grow into one body with you (as you would have them) while your Churches body is like a Leopard, and all bespotted (as appeares by your words) were very absurd; for you doe affirme, that the best of your members, even the Professors, especially of London, and of the great Townes in England; are very foule; yet I hope you will confesse, that they are the best of your members; then if it be true (as you say) that you must remove in your Reformation, all ignorant and scandalous persons: by your grounds, you should have but a very few to make a Church of as well as wee. For you must remove also all your Professors, which you say are so scandalous.

Therefore, I should rather counsell you to repent of all your evills that you have done, and be reconciled to God the Father, and Christ his Sonne, and separate your selves from all your wickednesse, and even come and grow up into one body with us.

Secondly, you say, Seeing your Churches, Ministers, and Ordinances be true, the erecting of new, and withdrawing from such Congregations, can never be answered to God.

I answer, Here you take for granted that which you cannot prove, and it is your wisdome so to doe, for by that meanes; you may make simple people beleeve, that you are very right, except a few defects, which no man shall be freed from, while he is in this life.

But now to the point; and first, touching your Churches and Ministers, which you say be true, and you also say, the Independant men would grant them to be true, upon a Reformation, such as the Word requires.

I tell you for answer, that this your juggling will not helpe you, for no man is bound to take your bare word, therefore it is good you make proofe of that which you have said.

But before you goe to prove your Churches true, declare unto me what Churches you meane? for I ever tooke the whole Land of England to be but one Church, (as it stands established by the Canon Laws) and that all the Parishes in the Land make up but one entire body, therefore what is amisse in one Parish, all the whole are guilty of, and it will be laid to the charge of the Archbishops, who are the Metropolitanes, or chiefe Priests over the Church of the Land. Seeing it is so, you must stand out to maintaine your Church, and you neede not to trouble your selfe about your Church-es for I know no dependancie you have upon any, except it be Rome, according as I have told you before in the conclusion of my answer to your first tenth Reason against Independencie. Therefore this is the Church that you must maintaine, even the Church of England, established by the Canon Laws, consisting of Archbishops, Diocesan Bishops, with all the rest of that crew; for this is indeed both your Church and Ministry, which doth appeare by your owne ground, because you affirme, that in this part lieth all the power: but (by your owne grounds) the whole body of the Land (I meane of the Laitie (as you call them) hath no power at all to reforme any abuse: therefore this Clergy must needs be your Church; and thus you make your selves the head, and body, and all the rest of the Land the eayle to follow after you.

Now if you can prove this to be a true Church, which hath neither ground, nor footing in Christs Testament, you will worke wonders: but indeede such wonders have been wrought by you; for all the world hath wondered, and runne after the beast, saying, Who is like unto him? and who is able to make warre with him?Rev. 13. as you may plainely see in the 13. of the Reveation. Therefore they that doe justifie such a Church, are such as have beene deceived by her false miracles, even by the fire which she hath made to come downe from heaven.

I pray you did not fire come downe from heaven in Queene Maries time, and devour the Saints in Smithfield; if you understand heaven in that place, as I understand it (to be the seate of the Magistrate) you must grant the same, for they are called Gods, and the children of the most high.

For your forefathers did (as Pilat did) wash their hands from the blood of the Saints, and of the innocent, and turned them over, for their sentence of condemnation, to the Secular power, which you made your hornes, and your heads pushed them forward to execute your bloody cruelty; and thus you may see that fire came downe from heaven, in the sight or apprehension of men for most that beheld it thought it was just, because it was the sentence of the Magistrate.

And by this all men may see, that you of the Clergie are the Church of England and that this Clergy came from Rome,Whence the Church of England is derived. Whence the Church of Rome is derived. and that therefore your Church is derived from Rome.

Now if you would know whence the Church of Rome was derived; I conceive that her power was derived from the beast with seven heads, which rose up out of the sea, as you may read of in the thirteenth of the Revelations, for there both those beasts are mentioned, and also the Image of the first beast, which the second beast hath caused to be made, which is even here in England amongst us; and you may see I have proved unto you already what it is; as you may also read in the 15. verse of that Chapter, it was that to whom the beast gave a spirit, and also he gave it power that it should speake, and cause as many as would not worship the Image of the beast, to be killed, and hath not this Image caused aboundance to be killed in England, and hath not he caused all to receive his marke, or his name, or the number of his name; and they that have it not, may neither buy nor sell, as it is apparant by the testimonie of the Scripture it selfe, and wofull experience.

And is not this Image the Church that now you pleade for? which consisteth of all the Priests of England;What the Image of the first beast is. if it be not, I pray you tell me what it is?

But if this be it (as it appeares it is) then these are your Ministers also; and then it hath beene proved plainely, whence this your Church and Ministry came. And that any of understanding should grant this Church, and Ministry to be a true Church and Ministery, would bewray great ignorance in them.

Further you adde, that they acknowledge the Ordinances to be true.

In this I doe beleeve you upon your bareword, for it is a truth, if you meane Gods Ordinances which you have amongst you.

As first, you have the Scripture but you wring it and wrest it, according to your owne devices, and make of it a nose of waxe, and a leaden rule to leane which way your minde leadeth you; and though you ought to take that reede or rod in your hand, at all times (if you were Gods messengers) to measure both the Temple and the Altar and the worshippers, (Rev. 11 2, yet you have not learned that skill, (for your Church and Ministrie holdeth no correspondencie with that measuring line.) but contrariwise you have taken that golden cup, and filled it full of abominations; may, you have hacked it and mangled it to peeces, and made it into little lessons, which you call your Epistles and Gospells & they are Dedicated to your Saints, upon your Saints-Dayes; and thus you may see though you have the Scriptures (which is the Word of God) and take upon you to unfold the mysteries thereof, yet in stead of that, you darken the truth by false glosses.

Secondly, you have the Sacraments, even baptisme, and breaking of breade: but you pervert them both, to your owne destruction; neverthelesse they still remaine Gods Ordinances, even as the golden vessells, were Gods vessels, when they were in Babel though Belshazar made them his quassing boules, yet still they remained to be Gods vessels. Even so did Circumcision remaine Gods Ordinance, though it was with Ierobeam. The like may be said of Baptisme; in still remaines Gods Ordinance, though it be carried away with backesliding Antichristians (even the Apostate fallen stats) and so you may read in the eleventh of the Revelation, ver. 2. that the court must be left out, and be unmeasured; and the reason was because it was given to the Gentiles, even to them that should tread downe the holy citie for 42. monethes; this court we know belonged to the Temple (as you may read in the 42. of Ezekiel) and had in it the Ordinances belonging to the people. And although you have Baptisme, and the Lords Supper they will not sanctifie you; though they may be sanctified to the use of them amongst you which are Gods people, according to the election of grace.

And though you have some of Gods Ordinances, amongst you; yet you have added unto them many Ordinances of your owne devising, which doth utterly debarre the Lords people, which have knowledge of them, from communicating with you in any worship.

As for example,

How shall any man partake with you of the word preached in your assemblies, but he must needs partake also with the false calling of the Priest, by which it is preached, for none else are suffered to preach amongst you, (by your leave or approbation,) but they that preach by that false power.

And who shall receive the Sacraments with you, and not justifie your devised Service-booke? for all your things are administred by that. And as all the Lords Ordinances ought to be sanctified by the Word of God and prayer: So on the contrarie you labour to sanctifie your things, by the stinted service-booke; and therefore the withdrawing from you, may be answered to God.

Further, you beare the world in hand, that you have but something amongst you wanting yet, that were to be desired, and therefore you say there is no cause to leave the Kingdome, nor for private men to set up true Churches.

Answer, Indeed If your Church & Ministers could be proved true (which you see is a thing unpossible) then it had beene needlesse (as you say) to leave the Land; but neither is your Church nor Ministers true, nor can the Ordinances be had amongst you without sinne: and that this is the judgement of the Independant men, is plaine by your former confession; Where you affirne, they will not heare of growing into one body (or communicating) with you before a Reformation; neither submit to your Classes or Presbyters, as Jure Divino.

But in the next place you say, the setting up of devided Churches, would be to the scandall of all the Churches, and not the giving of scandall to one brother, but to tenue thousands of Congregations.

Truely (Mr. Edwards) you overshoote your selfe (in that you make your selfe such an apparant dissembler) for you would make men beleeve, that you desire to keepe your Church and brethren unspotted, and yet you your selfe with your owne tongue, have most soulely scandalized the chiefe members of your Church, making them so soule a people, that they ought not to be communicated with.*

Further, your words imply that so long as a man is not put upon the practise of that which is unlawfull, be may beare.

I tell you againe, that your whole manner is unlawfull and therefore all the Lords people, as they desire to be blessed and to be sound walking in Gods waves have cause to separate from your Church, and to practise Gods Ordinances among themselves, as well as they who are separated already, (which you here you call Brownists) and the grounds and causes be so great, that they may well be justified.

But you would have conscious men to consider Mr. Robinson, concerning circumstantiall corruptions; you say, he shewes it is not an intolerable evill, for evill men be suffered in the Church, &c. yet you confesse be affirmes it to be an evill.

Two things are here to be minded.

First, that you would still please your selfe with this, that you have a true Church (though corrupted) which hath beene proved contrary.

Secondly, that you would justifie your Church by the sinnes of others.

But you know what Mr. Robinson saith, That the government instituted by Christ is not onely neglected or violated in the Church of England, but the plaine contrarie to it is established by Law.

But you say, now supposing your Reformation, it will be otherwise with England, then when he writ.

But (you may see) it is verie plaine that the crueltie, and wickednesse, of the Church of England hath increased ever since that time.

You say there is but something neglected, and you would make it the want of some Law to suppresse evill men.

To which I answer, That your Canon Lawes be evill Lawes, and your Lawmakers evill men, and therefore it could not stand with their principles to make Lawes to suppresse evill men.

Thirdly, you say, that they (whom you call Independant) live in and are members of such Churches, and yet they thinke it unlawfull, to forsake them.

I pray you, have any of them told you, that their Churches be like the Church of England? you must make proofe thereof, for in this I will not take you upon your bare word.

Further, you say they want some parts of Government and Officers, appointed by Christ, more materially than will be in your Church, upon a Reformation.

I answer, I have plainely proved to you: that Christs Church hath his Government, and Officers; but your Church hath neither Christs Government nor Officers. But what it will be upon the Reformation. I cannot tell.

But you say, they must want the Ordinances, or else they must have them with instruments, without ordination.

I answer, This is untrue as hath beene proved at large, in the answers to one of your former Reasons against Independancie.

But you say you would have them beare with the defects in your Church, and waite till God give you more light.

I answer, I know none that interrupteth you, for wee will neither meddle with your Idols, nor with your Gods: if you would but suffer us to worship our God, after the way that you call boresie.

The next thing you say is that they tell you that something may be omitted for a time, and that affirmatives binde not alwayes and that the exercise of Discipline may be forborne for a time, when it will not be for edification to the Church, but for destruction; and therefore you question them for not incorporating themselves into your Church, though something were more there to be desired, yet you say, there will be nothing contrary put upon them (nor quite another thing.)

Now that something may be omitted for a time, that may plainely appeare; for a man that hath brought his gift to the Altar, and there remembreth that his brother hath ought against him, must leave the offering of his gift, and goe and be reconciled to his brother, Matth. 5. 23. 24.

Now that affirmatives binde not alwayes, is plaine; for they binde not alwayes in cases of impossibility, but in such cases God accepteth the will for the deede.

Further, whereas you say, the excellencie of discipline may be forborne for a time, when it is not for Edification of the Church, but for destruction;

I say, true discipline, (being rightly used) is alwayes for the edification of the Church, and never for destruction.

And whereas you affirme, that there is nothing contrary put upon us by you, (or quite another thing;)

I answer, wee know you have none of Gods Ordinances, without some other thing to accompany them.

Fourthly, you say, that they may safely be members of your Church in the Reformation of you.

I answer, You might well have spared this your vaine repetition till you had obtained a Reformation.

But the Reason you have heard alleadged for their first going away granted in a letter from Rotterdam. that reason still remaines (though you say it is ceased) and will remaine till the Reformation, you have formerly promised,

But say you, that practise they judge themselves tied to, is founded upon a false principle (namely) that the power of government is given by Christ to the body of the Congregation.

I answer, I have told you before, (in the reply to the second part of this your answer to their third Reason) & I now tell you againe, that you make your Priests the head and body both; but Christ hath given the power to the Church which is his body, by whose power every Officer, and member thereof, doth move, and doe their severall Offices.

Fifthly, There is, say you a medium, between persecution and a publike Toleration; a middle way, say you, betweene not suffering them to live in the Land, and granting them liberty.

I Answer, This is a very true thing, for Pharaoh would have beene willing, that the children of Israel, should have stayed in Egypt, and made him bricke, but he would not suffer them to goe into the wildernesse, to offer sacrifice. But if Pharoah had beene willing to have succoured the children of Israel, he would have commanded his taskemasters not to lay burthens upon them, that they could not beare; but he did not doe so, and therefore their bricke-making turned to persecution, even as your injunctions and penall Lawes doe here in England, and you binde them up with a pretence of his Majesties command, which makes the burthen very mighty.

By this it is plaine, that no good man can live in England without persecution, even at this day.

But you would have them to have a third way, for you say persons may live in the Land, and injoy their Lands and liberties, and not be compelled to professe, and practise, things against their conscience.

I pray you (Mr. Edwards) bethinke your selfe now, how untruly you speake and whether you doe not looke one day to give an account, for your words, for you know that no man can live in this land, and enjoy his lands and liberty, but he shall be forced to worship according to the custome of the Nation. Nay, children that be but sixteene yeares of age, though ignorant, and scandalous in their lives, are forced to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, though it be to their utter condemnation.

Further you adde, that if upon petition to the Parliament, the Papists should have the Statutes repeated, which injoyne them to come to your Church, yet say you, the granting the Papists a publike toleration, for their Religion, would be quite another thing, in as much as you say though the Papists were the first in petitioning for the former, yet they move not for the latter.

For answer to this, I tell you;

First, That for granting the Papists publike exercises will not much crosse your principles, for they and you are naturall brethren.

Secondly, for that they move not for the latter (as you say:) They neede not for they injoy it without moving, and till this Parliament, none hath disturbed them for many yeares.

But further, you addr, that so you judge that the Independant men may live in the land freely and injoy their liberties and estates, (but you have your clause whereby you still crosse all your own tale; your clause is that it must be) by comming to your Churches, and enjoying the Ordinances.

Whereas you say so you judge, it presupposeth that the Papists doe come to your Churches, by what comes after, that it must be by comming to your Churches, and enjoying the Ordinances.

Indeede the Papists may come to your Churches, and injoy your Ordinances, for first they were their Ordinances, for when you apostated from Rome, you carried the Romish traditions with you, even as your forefathers in their apostacie from Christ Iesus, carried some of his Ordinances with them: so you retaine something of Gods to make your owne ware passe in sale, and have patched you up a bundle of worship borrowing also some lewish and He &illegible; Ceremonies to make up your packe; and will you be so kinde to suffer men to live in the land, if they will but submit to this worship, and promise them they shall never be compelled, to professe or practise any more? Indeede you are very liberall but it hath beene often said already, (and you have said it your selfe) that the Independant men, cannot of conscience communicate with you before a Reformation: Therefore if this be the medium you have (betweene leaving the Land and toleration.) even that they must submit to your worship, you might have bequeathed this Legacie to some that would accept of it, and give you thankes, for the Lord hath bequeathed liberty to his &illegible; and Servants, and hath purchased it at a deare price; even that they should be freed from all Egyptian bondage; and hath commanded them to stand fast in than liberty, wherein he hath made them free: and whether they must obey Gods commands, or your counsell be judge your selfe.

Sixtly, you say, If the former answers will not satisfie, but that they must needs be in a Church fellowship, as now they are then (you say) you you will shew them a way, according to their owne principles of a visible Church.

For answer whereof I must tell you, that fallacies, and false conclusions upon mens words, (without bringing their conditions) can satisfie no man concerning the matter in hand; but it may satisfie all men of your evill minde, that you still labour to turne away the truth as it may appeare; by the way you here have chalked them out, to walke in; which is

That because it is their principle (say you) that a few Saints joyned together in a Covenant, have power; therefore you imply that there should never neede a greater addition to them.*

This you may know crosseth the whole Scripture as the very prophesies of the Church under the New Testament that is to say, that a little one shall become a thousand, and a great one a strong Nation, Esay 60. 22. and that they should grow up as the Calves of the stall,Rev. 7. Mal. 4. 2. not onely in greatnesse, but also in number: and especially when the Lambe overcommeth, that is even when the Saints overcome,Rev. 12. 11. by the blood of the Lambe, and the word of their testimony, not esteeming their lives to the death.

Therefore you might have saved your schollership, when you went about to teach them, to make Churches in houses, and also to come to your Church, to the Word, Prayer, and Sacraments, for they have not so learned Christ; to come one part of the day to worship before the Idols, and to stand another part before God, for if they should doe so, the Lord saith, (Ezek. 44. 13.) they should not come neere him, neither to doe the office of the Priest, nor to come neare the holy things, but that they should beare their shame, and their abomination.

Further, you might have saved your labour in teaching them, to make family Churches: for God hath directed them what to doe in their Families.

And it is not the practise of Gods people, to shut out from their prayers, and holy duties, them that are of their Family: for God gave his Law to Abraham for another end (namely) that he should teach it his Family, and by so doing, traine up members in his family, for Christs Family.

Further, you might have spared your care taken to shew a way for maintenance, for those men among us, that are schollers bred, for if you can find no better maintenance for them, then to come and be Lecturers amongst you (as you would have them) and to live in hope of the gifts of the dead; that is no good provision: for, for want of those shooes men may goe long barefooted seeing they cannot (by your owne confession) doe that of conscience till there be a Reformation. But you might rather have perswaded your Parish Priests to have bequeathed some of their large revenewes unto them: for whether they have Parsonage or Vicarage their pole-money comes in so thicke to them and their followers, that it would make any sober minded man or woman to wonder how they can consume it: for besides their ordinary tithes or maintenance; which is the principall, they have many other petty dues, which they require of every one of the Kings subjects, & they are not so reasonable as his Majestie, which is contended with pole-money from his subjects, from 16. yeares old, and upward, but they will have a share out of him that is borne without life; as it will plainely be proved) for if a dead child be borne into the world, they will be paid for reading a dirge over it, before it shall be laid in the earth, and they will be apt to inferre, that that their deere brother is departed in the faith, though it be the childe of theeves and murderers, and the like.

Further, they will yet have another patrimony for the birth of that childe, for before the mother dare goe abroade, shee must have their blessing; that the Sun shall not smite her by day, nor the Moone by night; for which blessing of theirs, they must have an offering, and the like they require for all the children that be borne into this world, though there live not one of sixe to be men or women.

But for as many of them as doe live, they enlarge their Revenewes. for, if they live to come to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, then they must pay their offerings yearely to the Priest, though the bread and wine be provided at the parishes charge.

Further, if they live to enter into the state of Matrimony, then they must be joyned together by a Priest, for which worke of his he must have a large Offering.

And these men be not content to take money where there is money (as the King is) but they will have these (which they call dues) of him that liveth of the very almes of the Parish, whereas the King taketh not a penny of any that receive almes.

Then if we consider their exaltion how they oppresse the people, by their cruell forcing of them to pay so much as they demand, (though it be contrary to all Law or equity) it will cause us to wonder at the hardnesse of their hearts for rather then they will abate any thing of what they demand they will force poore people even to pawne their cloathes; for I am able to prove that they doe demand of poore people before they can have a childe (that is but fourteene, or fifteene yeares of age) buried in one of the out-Church-yards of the great Parishes (which land is the free gift of the dead, for the helpe of the poore, even as Creplegates new Church-yard, or Algates, Rosemary lane, or White Chappell; Mile-in greene, (or others the like;) before (I say) they can have such a child buried there, it will cost the poorest parent, seven or eight shillings: Nay, I have knowne when they have distrusted paiment, that they have affirmed, that they would not bury them, except they had their money paid before hand: Nay, when any poore man bringeth out of the remote places of the city any Corps to Bedlam (which is the cheapest place that I know) ye when all things else is discharged, even as, Bearers Wages, Graveaggers Wages, and the ground paied for also; yet they must be constrained to have a twelve-penny Priest, to say something over the grave, and he will grudge if he have not more than a shilling (though he say but a few words without the booke) when (perhaps) all the people that be left alive in the Family, be not worth a shilling.

Furthermore, If any poore man have a necessitie to worke, upon one of their Saints-dayes, then Mr. Paritor must come, and have a grote, for citing him to the Court, but if he appeare not, he must be Presented, and for not paying Fees, he shall be Excommunicated, and he shall never be blessed in again, but (though he be the poorest man in the Kingdome) the price of his blessing will be a noble at the least: but if he happen to die an Excommunicant, then his friends must give money to absolve him after he is dead, or else he shall not be buried in the consecrated Earth: but if his friends will goe to the Office, and give but a matter of five pound for his Absolution, after he is dead; then he shall be buried in the Consecrated ground; and they will also affirme he died in the Faith of Christ, ye though he were excommunicated for notorious sinne, and lived and died, obstinately in it.

It is a plaine case therefore, that these men are a greater plague to this Land, then the naturall Locusts of Egypt, for they ate up the greene things, but these eate up both greene and dry.

Nay, further. I conceive they are more prejudiciall to the Common wealth, than the Frogges that came up upon the Land of Egypt, for they entred into the Oven, and into the Kneading Trough: and wee reade not that they ascended higher than the Kings bed, and the beds of his Servants; but these are exalted above the Chimney tops, to catch a Smoke-penny from every poore mans house.

Thus you see the mighty Revenewes of the Priests: If I had but time to tell you of the things which I know (even of the extent of their Revenewes) what is gained unto the generality of Priests, by granting of Licenses to Midwives, and to Schoolemasters, with divers of their own Officers, such as Paritors, Sumners, & Pursevants, with a number of that Ranke, which have strange names that I know not, It would (as I said before) make all men wonder, how it is devoured: for they must be freed from all taxations, and have their houses rent free, and many times eate their bread at other mens tables, and yet (for the most part) they die poore men, and farre in debt, and leave behinde them, both wives and children, destitute of Calling and Maintenance, which is a plaine case to me, that the hand of God is upon this Generation, in cursing that which they would have blessed. And therfore I will confesse that I was overseene (in the entrance into this Discourse) when I moved you to perswade these men to bequeath some thing to their brethren, (that are Schollers bred;) for I did not consider, that though they received much, yet they had but little to give, because it is not blessed for increase: but I should rather have comforted you, with giving you knowledge, that God hath provided maintenance for his Ministers; as well as for his People, that they neede not bow to you for a morsell of bread; for God taught his Apostles to worke with their hands, as Paul saith, that his hands ministred to his necessities, and those that were with him; Acts 20. 34. not that Paul might not receive of the people carnall things, for he declareth the contrary in another Scripture, and I hope, all the Lords people will confesse that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and that it is their duty to make them partakers of their carnall things, of whom they receive spirituall things.

Further, you are carefull to have them sober, and peaceable, and not to preach and speake against what is established by Law.*

Indeede (I must tell you) in my judgement, no man can make way for a true Reformation, except hee declare what is evill, before he shew what is good.

Further you say, you suppose subscriptions will not be injoyned to formes of Government and Discipline.

Here you seeme to yeeld that your formes of Government and Discipline be not of God; then if there be no injunction, none will obey, but if injunctions, none will obey for conscience; for what good man can yeeld to an injuction that is not of God, so then, (you may see) your injunctions have beene the way and meanes to breed and bring forth a world of hypocrites, as one may easily see by the Time servers of your Church.

But you say, that without a toleration we may injoy in a secret way our Church fellowship.

Indeede (M. Edwards) we have learned that lesson already, for Christ hath taught us, that we shall fly into the Wildernesse,* and that the earth shall helpe us* but sometimes it proves to the danger of our lives, and alwayes to the danger of our liberty; as it may appeare by the practise herein London, for though wee meete never so privately, and peaceably, yet such Cattle as your selfe, are alwayes bleeting in the eares of your Parish Officers, and Constables, with your other Officers, even till you move the Lord Major himself to be your drudge, and as your horne, which you push forward, for the destruction of our bodies, when he hath laid violent hands on them, for it is evident that it hath beene to the losse of some of their lives; and this is the liberty we have in this Kingdome and all through the instigation of you Priests.

But you say, though some of the more sober and conscientious Ministers and people could use it better, yet the Brownists and Anabaptists, and weake brethren would be apt to scandall: and therefore to avoid scandall, you would insinuate that we are bound to neglect the whole forme of Church worship.

I told you before, and I tell you now, that you are afraid to have your owne glory ecclipsed and by this all men may see, (and by all your formers answers also) that you would have us to enjoy in this Kingdome, neither Ordinances, nor conscience.

The next thing you lay downe, is the judgement of an antient Father; But indeede he is as sound in the faith as your selfe, for hee would have men to joyne to Churches that have no power.*

And this being the sixth answer that you have given to their third reason, you entreat them to lay all your sixe together, and to consider &illegible; whether God require, unlesse they have a toleration to leave the Kingdome to roome many hazards, and dangers, when as they may enjoy, so much at home, without a Toleration, as you say you have opened to these sixe answers.

To wch I answer, when they are laid all six together, they make but a peece of an answer to one of their Reasons, and this piece of your answer is stuffed full of falicies, as hath beene already proved, and may further appeare, by the conclusion of all here, when you say they may have so much at home, for it hath beene proved already, that they can have nothing at home, either in respect of liberty, or worship; (but what they must have by stealth;) for when they would injoy the Ordinances of God, which are lewels, which you would have none to have but your selves, that so you might seeme glorious; If any (I say) will presume to borow the lewels, and carry them away, you will pursue after them; and you know it was the practise of the Egyptians of old, for they would have suffered the Israelites to have gone away empty, and left their cattle behinde them, so that they might have had nothing with them to have offered sacrifice withall; and I pray you were not the Southsayers the cause of this? by withstanding Moses and Aaron, against the children of Israel, even by the false Figures which they cast before the eyes of Pharaoh, to harden Pharoahs heart, even as you Priests doe at this day.

And thus I have laid together your sixe Reasons, and weighed them; but one truth is sufficient to overweigh them all.

But yet you have also a seventh Answer which is by it selfe: and it is this, That if they will not be satisfied (say you) without setting up Churches; it is better they should get out of the Kingdome.

Besides, you would have all others that be of this minde, to leave the Land, and goe to New-England, that cannot be satisfied, but that they must erect Churches to the disturbing of the peace of three Kingdomes.

Truely (Mr. Edwards) you shew your selfe a bloody minded man, that would have the Innocent suffer for the faults of them that are guilty. Was not the sending of your Masse-bookes into Scotland the cause of the disturbance? and hath it not appeared plaine enough to the Parliament and to the Scots, before the Parliament sate, that the Bishops and Priests were the cause of the disturbance? I doubt not but you have read both the Scotish Intentions, and their Demands, with their Dedarations, which have plainely manifested, who and what was the cause of the disturbance, it was not the meeting of a handfull of the Lordspeople, which ever sought and do seeke the good and wellfare of the three Kingdomes, with the life & happy reigne of their Soveraigne Lord the King, who alwayes sue unto God for the peace of the Kingdome, in whose peace they may enjoy peace: but contrariwise, it plainely appeares, that it was you and your Fathers house which caused this variance.

But say you, it will be no great harme for many of them to goe away.

I answer, It is like you apprehend the Judgements of God comming upon you, and you thinke to be eased, by driving out the Lords people in haste.

Further, you say, you would rather goe to the uttermost parts of the earth to live in a meane and hard condition, rather than you would disturbe the peace or good of three Kingdomes.

For Answer, to this I must tell you, I would you had considered this before you had done it. But now seeing God of his mercy hath reconciled them againe, it may be the wisedome of you and your fellowes, to depart unto Rome, that Gods true Religion may be set up here in England without Popish Injunctions, that so the last errour be not worse than the first; for you say, It is better that one perish than Vnity; therefore (in my judgement) it is better that they should runne the hazard, who have occasioned the strife.

Further, you plead for your selfe and for hundreds of your brethren, that you have borne the brunt of the times, and yet you doe professe that you will submit to what is established by Law, because you hope it will be blessed and glorious.

I tell you, you are even like Isachers Asse and so are the rest of your fellowes, even willing to stoope downe between two burdens, because ease is good: for the Law indeede makes every thing seeme glorious; but for any brunt that you have borne in these last times; I thinke it hath not over-loaded you; for I have not heard that you have beene at two pence cost, to maintaine the Lords people in prison; and therefore you are very unlike to Obadiah, for instead of hiding of the Lords people, you cry out upon the Parliament to have them hunted; and this is a great brunt indeed, (if it be well considered) and it is doubt it will cost you deare, (by that time you have paid your reckoning) except God give you repentance.

But you further expresse, that you would not set up true Churches against a true Church.

I answer, neither would these Independant men, I hope, for those things which God teacheth his servants to doe, be not against the truth, but for the truth, neither can they be any cause of Divisions, or heart-burnings, betweene either Ministers or People.

And thus you may see, and behold, that your seventh Answer (to their third Reason) that you have now left alone, is a Noune Adjective in respect of proving any thing that you brought it for.

YOu say their fourth Reason is, that if the Ministers and Churches be not tolerated, they are afraid that in time they shall draw most of the good people out of the Land after them.

And for answer to this, you say, you suppose they rather hope than feare it; and that, (say you) plainely sheweth, they have a good conceit of themselves, and of their owne way.

For answer to you, I say, that this your Answer is but a Supposition, neither do I know whether it be their Reason, for methinks it sounds somewhat like Nonsense, but your Supposition will not prove them to have a good conceit of themselves, neither of any way of their owne; for it is the way of the Lord Iesus Christ, that they plead for.

Secondly, you say, you feare too, but not as they doe, but your feare is, least toleration should draw away many good people.

I pray you trouble not your selfe, too much, for if there be no toleration, the good people will flye from you, and stand a farre off, and waite for the Reformation which you have all this while promised.

But now at last you seeme to make a doubt of any Reformation at all, when you say, If the Ceremonies and Liturgie stand in full force* which presupposeth,Pag. 48. lin. 14. that you conceive they will stand still; but no doubt, but if they be setled by Law, they will seeme glorious to you, although they are in themselves Romish Traditions.

Further, you adde, if these stand in force, and Churches tolerated; they will make brave worke in a short time.

I answer, you are so fearefull least the Lords people should enter into the citie of promise, that it is very like you never intend to enter in your selfe; and that makes you gather up your hopes, in the midst of all your feares: setting a worke your confidence, that God will preserve many judicious, and advised Christians from your way; and therefore you counsell them, to whom you speake, to let them be well shipped, and a Reformation in Government and Ministers; and then you say your feare will be over.

Truely methinkes you patch your matter together very disorderly: for you have many times said, that upon a Reformation they would communicate with you.

But now you would have them well shipt,Pag. 48. lin. 20. which I thinke is the Reformation which you desire: as may appeare by the confused speech which you make afterwards; for you say; When there is a Reformation amongst you in Government and Ministers, that feare is over with you; and your Reason is, because when that which first bred these men* is taken away, which (say you) was the violent pressing of Ceremonies, and the casting out of good Ministers; and many notorious persons being suffered in the Church of England without all censures, shall be removed; many (say you) will not be bred, and others will be satisfied, and some godly painefull Ministers of the Church of England would out-preach them, and out-live them.

To this I answer, you seemed in the beginning of your Answer, to make them proud persons, or conceited of themselves But now methinkes, I heare you boast very much of your selfe, and others of your Church.

But I thinke it may be very true: for you cannot chuse but out-preach them, if you preach them out of the Kingdome.

And it is very like you may out-live them also; if you can but banish them into some hard country, or else get them into some stinking prison, as you and the rest of your Fathers house have done very lately.

But further you adde, that you and your fellowes, will compare with them for all excellencies and abilities.

Me thinkes it had beene more credit for you to have given your neighbours leave to speake.

But now you have advanced your selfe, you labour to cast them downe, for you say, you knew many of them long before they fell to this way, but you have not seene any of them better, nor more profitable, for you say, whilst they were in the Church of England, they preached often, and now seldome.

I Answer, it is very like they dare not tell such as you when they preach, that cry out to the Parliament to disturbe their meetings.

Further, you say, they goe looser in their apparell and haire.

I answer, I know some indeede that have beene constrained to change their apparell for feare of persecution and (it may be) the haire you were offended at, might be some Perriwigge, which some of them have beene constrained through feare to put on, to blinde the eyes of the Bishops Blood-hounds, when they have come to take them.

Further, you exclaime against them, that they take lesse care for publike things that concerne the glory of God, and the salvation of mens soules.

I answer, if their care be so little, you may wonder, what makes them to take this paines, and care, to travell out of a farre countrey, to sue to the Parliament, by humble petition, for freedome of conscience, and liberty for Gods publike worship, which are things most concerning the glory of God, and the salvation of mens soules.

Further, you accuse them, that their spirits are growne narrow, like their Churches, and that they grow strange, reserved, and subtill; further, you say, in a word, they minde little else, but the propagation of their Independant way.

For answer whereof I say to you, that it is no marvell though their spirits grow narrow, towards such an Adversarie as your selfe, and great cause they have to be strange towards you, and reserved and subtill also.

But whereas you say their Churches be narrow:

I say they are even like the way to heaven or the gate that leadeth unto life, which is so narrow, that such as you can hardly enter in thereat.

But if their greatest care be (as you say) to set up the Independant way* (which is the way of God:) This still crosseth your former slander of them, that they little minde the publike good, and salvation of mens soules. But that this is true (namely, that they minde little else but the propagation of their Independant way) you bring the Protestation Protested to witnesse, which Testimony maketh them peaceable men, because they desire to meddle with no mans businesse but their owne.

And if they minde little else but to set up the Independant way, then it will also crosse your following speech, (which you say, you speak from your conscience and experience) that never any of them, bad so large a spirit for good, after they fell into that way, nor tooke such care (you say) for the propagation of the Gospell, and preaching the Word to men without.

I tell you, indeede if they did not take care to preach the Word to men without, they would never come to preach amongst you, much lesse would they then sue for libertie so to doe, (as the Welsh Ministers have done) if they had not a desire to informe the ignorant, in those truths that God hath revealed to them.

And therefore you may see in your accusations against them, you are proved a very slanderer, and have taken upon you the office of Sathan, the old accuser of the Brethren.

But you conceive God never honoured them so much afterward.

But seeing it is but your conception, it matters not; for if they were active for God, and did famously and worthily before they entred into the way of God, I am sure they could not but be more active afterwards; for when a man is in a Journey (especially if he know or conceive himselfe to be out of the way) he goeth on heavily till he meeteth with some directer, either to informe him that he is in the right way, or to direct him how he shall get into it; and being setled in his right way, hee goeth on more cheerefully, and actively than hee could doe in the time of his doubting; even so it must needs be with these men, as I said before.

Againe, you say, that the men that hold those principles of Separation, God did never honour much.

I answer, it seemes you thinke Gods thoughts are as your thoughts, and because you seeke for the praise of men and have it, and a few men honour them: and because Christs flocke is a little flocke, therefore you imagine they are not honoured of God, which is very carnall reasoning.

But as you have slandered the men all this while; so now you here slander their way (and principles) which way is the way of God, and whose principles are Gods truthes; yet (you say) there is such a malignitie eleaves to it, even as doth to the Episcopacie.

This is a very great slander, to compare Godswayes to the wayes of Sathan, in saying there is such a malignity cleaving to it, which alters mens spirits, and makes their hearts worse; and yet you here confesse, that many of them continue good in the maine.

Thus much for your Fourth Reason.

YOu say, their fifth Reason is, That this is no other but envy in the Ministers, that makes them against Toleration, because they feare their people will desert from them, and come to us, being so pure in Ordinances, and Churches; and thus you say the Protestation Protested speakes.

Your answer to this Reason is,

1. That it is not out of envie, but you hold their practise sinfull and unwarrantable to separate from your Churches, and to erect such Congregations, and therefore you say, you speake against it, and that you here promise to make good in a following Discourse.

For answer to this, I must tell you, that it is not your denying it to be out of Envie, that will cleare you, for there is nothing appeares more plainer, than that envie against the truth, and the Professors thereof, was the cause of your writing against Toleration.

And that it is through feare your people will desert, is plaine, by your owne confession in your Fourth Reason; where you say, that if the Liturgie, and Ceremonies, stand in force, and Toleration be granted, they will make brave worke in a short time and yet you hope some judicious Christians (as you say) will be kept from their way.

But in that you here say, you bold the practise sinfull and unwarrantable.

You have made that part of your judgement knowne already before; but your judgement was grounded upon no true Principle; and therefore it hath beene already proved to be emoneous.

And whereas you say, you will make it good to be sinfull in a following Discourse:

I answer, If you can but make men beleeve this, you will worke a wonder. But I know it is impossible, for you to make good your promise, and therefore I cannot expect performance.

Now to cleare your selfe.

2. You say, it cannot be counted envie in Ministers, to be unwilling to have their flocks, and people fall from them.

I answer, By so saving, you rather confirme their Reason than remove it, (namely) that it was your feare of the deserting of your people.

But for you to insinuate, that the people that be called out of a way of sinne, and brought into the way of grace, and liberty, be stollen away, and tempted away by strangers (as you would make it) concluding that it is as tolerable for children to for sake their parents, renouncing the ascribe that bare them, and the pappes that gave them sucke; throwing dirt in the face of father and mother, as it is for a man to forsake Idolatrous worship; this is an unjust comparison, and crosseth the whole tenor of the Scripture.

Now you would make this your owne case, for you allude to your spirituall children, who (say you) are the fruit of your labours.

I pray you, how can you count the Parish of St. Elens your spirituall children, seeing you are there but an hireling; and as you have not begotten them to the Faith, so you have not taken the charge of them, to watch over them as a Spirituall. Father, and you will onely preach to them so long as any will pay you wages, but no longer; how then have you converted them to God? from what have you converted them? or what have you converted them too? have you turned them from serving dumbe Idols, to serve the living God? I have heard of no great change of them, nor of any other where you have preached; you found them in the Church of England, and you found them Christians, (in your owne judgement) and you know they were baptized, when you came to them; and in the same Church where you found them, there you leave them; I pray you, how have you begotten them to God? you found them under a false power, submitting to a false worship, and you justifie them as men begotten to God, and you justifie their standing there. Thus doe you sow pillowes of flatteries under their elbowes.

But you neede not to feare any mans comming to steale your Disciples away by night, as the Jewes gave out falsely of Christs naturall body, for that was but a lie; therefore let no man presume to lie by their example.

But you say therefore you ought to watch against us, (and ought not to sleepe) least they should be stolne* away.

I answer, so did the Jewes watch the naturall body of Christ and yet he by his power raised himselfe, and also departed from them; even so by the same power will he raise from the death of sinne, many that are amongst you, and will cause them to separate themselves from your false worshipping, and from you that are false worshippers, and he will tell them where he feedeth his sheepe, and causeth them to lie downe at noone.*

Neither can you cleare your selfe by saying, you fitty them, and love them, and would not have such a sword as a toleration put into their hands (as you are pleased to say) to hurt them, though some amongst them (say you) might perhaps use it better.

I pray you feare not this, (which you here call an error on the right hand) but rather feare your Church, if (as you say) your Liturgie and Ceremonies stand still in force, which (you say) were the causes that bred the Separates.*

I tell you, if the same cause remaine you may justly feare, it will take the same effect; you have also as great cause to feare the prophanenesse and Atheisme, which is feared in the hearts of most of your people, but onely that you blesse your selfe, in hope that all ignorant and scandalous persons shall be driven out. But I pray you tell me, whither doe you intend to drive them? if you leave them any where in the Land, they will be still of your Church: except you will make you a new Church: But if you should drive them out of the Land, you would leave many places of the Land uninhabited; for the generalitie of the people (in most parts) be ignorant, and prophane; and thus you may see your selfe in a great streight, and therefore you have great cause to feare.

Further, you say, the Author would intimate that the honest soules are with them, and would be for their way; but as for those that are against their way and Toleration, they are not such honest soules.

If this Author be the Protestation Protested, you have wrested his words, for he hath not said they are not such honest soules neither hath he entred into judgement against any.

But further, (you say) you would have them know that the honest soules are not onely with them: for in the Church of England (say you) there ever have beene, and are honest Ministers and people, that have rejected our way, and any that fell to it, nay the greatest Nonconformists, and most able in that way (you say) have written the most against our way, and laboured upon all occasions to preserve the people from falling to us.

For answer whereof, I must tell you, that the Ministers, and people, were never the honester for rejecting of that way, (which hath beene proved to be the way of God) though they were the greatest Nonconformists in the world: for it is not our way properly, but the gift of the Father, which he hath given us, to walke in; and surely, it is no signe of honesty to commend the Saints in their infirmities, or to condemne them in their workes of pietie; I say, it is no signe of an honest soule to speak evill of such a holy way: I tell you, I take Hugh Latimer to be an honest soule, though he have declared both by word and writing against such as you; and affirmed, that a lay man fearing God, is much more fit to understand the holy Scripture, then a proud and arrogant Priest; yea, then the Bishop himselfe be hee never so great and glistering in all his pontificalls: and such honest soules (though they are not of the Clergie, but of those whom you call the Layetie:) are the fittest men on the earth to make Churches, and to chuse their owne Ministers (as I said before) though they be Trades-men; and such as these have dependancie upon Christ alone, whose way is properly the sincere way of God. And as for any that have writ against this way (or against those who walke uprightly in it) it will not make much for their account, for that part of their worke shall burne (as well as yours) though they may be saved: and as for these Authors which here you bring, which have beene so carefull (as you say) to keepe the people from falling into that way; I have reade some of their bookes, and found the most of them, prophesie sad things against he Church of England, except she repent.

THeir sixth Reason (you say) is, that they are good men, and men of great gifts, and therefore they should be tolerated to have such Churches, it is pitty they should leave the Land, and wee loose their prayers.

Indeede (Mr. Edwards) this may be some other, mans Reason, on their behalfe, but I hardly beleeve, that they lived so farre from good neighbours, that they must thus set forth their owne praise.

But for answer to this Reason, in the first place; you say, the better men they be, and the more able, the worse, to set up separated Churches.

To this I answer, that I ever conceived by the Scripture, that those that Christ ordained, to plant his Churches were good men, as it was said of Barnabas, that he was a good man* and the very like was said of Stephen* and therefore me thinks you are shreudly mistaken.

But further, you say, they will the more indanger the peace of the Kingdome, and make the Schismes greater.

I answer, If it be good and able men that indanger the peace of the Kingdome, you may doe well to perswade the Parliament, to keepe still in your Church, all the dumb and drunken Priests: for they are bad enough, and unable to doe good, and yet of my knowledge, they are very able to disturbe the peace, and to breed strife, and to bring Gods judgements upon the Land, which is able to make a greater Schisme than you are a ware of.

Secondly, you say, for their prayers, you have the benefit of them, as well when they are absent, as present, and some of them have said (say you) they prayed more far England when our, of it then in it.

Indeede if they did so, they did well, for that was their duty; but I suppose you (for your particular) had little benefit of those prayers, and that, because God hath hardened your heart, even against them, and all good men.

Thirdly, For these their prayers you have rewarded them with an accusation (namely) that they left the Kingdome, when it was in greatest danger, and in most neede of helpe, and provided for themselves to keepe in a whole skinne.

I answer, if they did evill in it, that evill is to be passed by; for it is very probable, that they did know that the GREAT CANONS were already made, and that they were mightily charged, and overcharged, as it may appeare by their shivering in pieces: but if they had held to have beene shot off; they might easily perceive, that they might beate holes in their owne skins, as well as in other mens, and they seeing the plague before hand, might be borne with to hide themselves.

But you say you stood without them here in the gappe, and prevailed with God.

I answer, It may be conceived, that they prevailed with God, who prayed so much for England, when they were out of it, for God will not heare sinners,* therefore you cannot expect that God should heare you, so long as you justifie the abominations of your bespotted Church; and you know Moses prevailed for Egypt, when he was out of the city.*

Exod. 9. 29. 33.But you say it is better to want their company, than to buy it at so deare a rate as a toleration, and you say you question not, but the Kingdome will doe well enough without them.

Is it possible, that you should enjoy the benefite of the prayers of those that you so much sleight, and set so little by their company, that rather then they shall have liberty, to worship God in a peaceable way (by your will) they should depare the Kingdome, when it is proved, by the Word of God that Gods servants are the strength & glory of the Kingdome: for even as the Prophets were the Charets and Horsemen of Israel, so are they that feare the Lord, a support to the Kingdome and Common-wealth wherein they live.

But as for your Kingdome of Priests, it shall neither stand without them, nor with them, for though the Prophets sought to heale Babel, yet it could not be healed, for your hornes shall be knocked off, and methinks I heare the decree gone forth, that your Kingdome is devided, and therefore you have neede, to set downe your resolution, that it shall not long stand, but the Kingdome of England may safely stand with Toleration.

Fourthly, you say for this Objection, of being good men, you will answer it at large in another Tractate, wherein (you say) you shall minde men of many dangers that may arise to them from good and eminent men; and further, you say you will fully shew what little strength is in that Reason, and cleare also many things in reference to that Objection.

I answer when I see this performed, I will take it into consideration, and then you may heare more of my minde; in the meane while, I rest in the Scriptures; which satisfie me, that good men ever bring a blessing.

The next thing you bring is this question (namely) whether conscientious men,Pag 52. who agree with you in the maine in points of Doctrine, and practise, may be tolerated and spared, in some things wherein they differ from that which is commonly received.

Indeede you have made divers answers to this already for it was before your owne question, in some of your Reasons alledged against them, where you affirme, that you iustifie much, both bearing and forbearing, and have also see the Counsell of ancient Fathers before them, to teach them to heare with others both in points of Doctrine and practise, wherein they may something differ from that which is commonly received.

But here further, you adde a more large answer, That you still say it is your judgement that there should be bearing in many differences of opinions and practise, so as Christians ought not to judge nor censure one another, nor refuse commotion and fellowship, by not admitting men into their Churches, and to the Ordinances.

You have seemed (all this while) to be afraid least they should admit too many into their Churches, and now you seeme to say, it is the fault of the Independant Churches to deny communion to many Saints for some differences in judgment, about Church-Government and Orders. Now if this be true (as you say it is) they are so farre from stealing away your members that they will not receive them into fellowship, if there be differences in judgment,* for which you here seeme to blame them, and therefore I think you would have them open the mouthes of their Churches wider, even as wide as yours. But the Scripture hath declared, that the gates of the holy city, are of an equall widenesse, for they are never shut, Rev. 21. 25 and yet they are so well watched by the Angels of God, even the Ministers of Christ Jesus, that there shall be no uncleane thing suffered to enter in thereat, &c.* Here you may see if any of you attempt to come in (who are so ignorant and scandalous and spotted (as you say they be) they shall not be suffered amonst us; for indeede they are fit for no society, but the society of your Fathers house: yet (I say) if any of these doe creepe in, it is through the neglect of the Portor, which the Lord hath set to watch, or else it must needs be by their cunning transfiguring themselves to be that which they are not.

But (you say) you would not have men forced to change their mindes, and opinions, by casting them violently out of the Ministry and Church, which (you say) was the practise of many in these late times, and hath caused,Pag. 52. so many Schismes and strifes amongst you.

Well, here all men may take notice, that it was the cruelty of the Clergie, that caused the Shismes and strifes, by forcing men to change their mindes, and not the practise of the Separation (as you here acknowledge) therefore in this confession you have crossed the tenor of many of your other arguments, as that the Separates have caused strife in the three Kingdomes, and that they had made the rents and Schismes, which now you acknowledge to be done by them (that force men to change their mindes) which are the Clergie of England.

Further, you say, that you approve not of such practises, but desire to be a follower, and lover of the wayes of peace and communion, with any who agree in the maine, and have something of God and Christ in them.

I answer, if you approve not of such practises, I hope you will not hereafter be an occasion to move Magistrates to force men to change their mindes, and so justifie your selfe in that you condemne in others, for you confesse your selfe, that though these Independent mens spirits be growne narrow (even closed up from you) yet they continue good in the maine;* and then sure they have something of God, and of Christ in them.

You say further, that the practise of the antient Fathers, that pleaded for bearing, are infinitely pleasing to you.

I answer, if they be infinitely pleasing to you, I hope you will never be unpleased againe, with any of the Lords servants, about keeping of dayes, which you say was the difference betweene these Fathers*

Moreover, you seeme to inferre, that because Siprian (whom you confesse, erred in the point of rebaptizing) would not condemne them, who were of a contrary opinion: that therefore men may be tolerated in their differences of opinions.

But here you have brought an erring Father (by your owne confession) to perswade us to keepe communion with those that are contrary minded but the Apostle exhorteth us to labour to be of one minde, that we may walke by one rule, but if any be otherwise minded, we ought to waite till God reveile further, and not to force him to be of our minde, till he hath faith in himselfe, grounded upon the Word of God. But that ground which you have (that men should be tolerated in their differences of opinions) is built upon the sayings of this Father Ciprian.

But presently you come with your provisall, which hath quite altered the Case, your provisall is (they may be tolerated) so long as they keepe communion with the Church, and submit to the Discipline and orders, and be peaceable, and not speake against what is established by common consent nor practise to the scandall and contempt of the Magistrate and Church.

I answer, this is but even a crossing of your owne speech againe, for this constraining of men to yeeld to whatsoever is established by common consent, is but a forcing of men to change their minds; which you said before, was the cause of Schisines and strifes, and though you approve not of it in others, yet (it seemes) you could freely practise it your selfe, as may plainely appeare by what you speake hereafter, which is the very same thing which you have often spoke already; that is, If a few men (halfe a dozen, or halfe a score) refuse communion with your Church, and vent opinions every where, to the disturbing of the Kingdome, and drawing disciples after them, though they were Ministers of gold, and had the tongues of men and Angels, they should not be tolerated.

Now you have strucke up the stroke, but it will not serve your turne; for this your vaine insinuation (that they disturbe the Kingdome and draw Disciples after them,) hath beene many a time disproved already, because it hath beene oftentimes repeated by you, to fill up your matter; nay your owne words have disproved your selfe, where you say, they will not receive them into fellowship except they be of their mindes.*

But further (you say) you would have us to reade Calvin upon that subject, in his last Epistle to Felerius: The matter you say is this, that if He would not be reduced into order, the Ministers should tell him, that he is not to be accounted as a brother, because he disturbed the common discipline.

What the Disciscipline was that he disturbed I cannot tell, but you say it was a Discipline that was common, which makes it appeare to mee, that it was like your Booke-worship, or your Common Prayer-booke, which is common as farre as the Pope hath any preheminence or jurisdiction; and that you confesse this Common Discipline, was not the Discipline of God, neither a Discipline that you approve of, appeares by your owne words.

That you judge it not of God, appeares here in your following words; where you grant this to be the authority of men, and that it is not to be sought after it: &c. and you know the things that they decreed was, that he that would not submit to the Synod must be put out of his place; and you say, that you would not have any cast out of the Ministery, or Church, because it breedeth Schismes* and by this it appeares, that you allow not of this manner of Discipline, and by this one may also plainely see, that you are made all of contradictions, as it may plainely appeare in the very next words following, where you conclude, that the authority of men is not to be sought, when the Spirit of God pronounceth of such, &c. and here you quote the 1 Cor. 11. 19. where you would make Paul an author of casting men out of their places, because they would not yeeld to the Synod. I pray you hath Paul in this Chapter discoursed of any such thing? was not the controversie here about long haire, about which Paul saith the Church hath no such custome of contention; and doth not Paul himselfe put the thing to be judged by the Church? in the thirteenth verse, where he saith, Iudge in your selves, Is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? and further, in the 14th. verse, Doth not nature it selfe teach us, that if a man have long haire it is a shame unto him? and was not this Doctrine grounded in the Law and Prophets, and confirmed and established by God long before the Apostles time? yes surely it was, and therefore it will not serve your turne, to prove that Synods may decree Customes, for the Church of God? but it will serve your turne to prove what you desire, that is, a dependancie between Rome and England, and that the Bishops of Rome and England by their Synods, should make all their shavelings to crouch and submit, and bow to their injunctions; for your owne practises prove it, by your very submitting, be it never so contrary to the Law of God, and of Nature it selfe, if it be but confirmed by a Synod; and therefore it appeares that it is your malignity of spirit, which causeth you to write as you doe.

But you say you doe it from a zeale;

But I tell you, it is a zeale against Gods glory and the good of his Church, and against the preservation of puritie of Doctrine, and holinesse of life, even at the best like unto the zeale which Paul had, before hee knew Christ, when he went with Letters from the high Priest, to persecute the Church of God, and when he was their Pursevant, to enter into houses, and to hale men and women to prison* if Paul should have said for himselfe, as you would now pleade for your selfe, that peace could not stand with toleration, and therefore it was meete to disturbe their meetings, it would not have served his turne, for if God had not stricken him downe in the way he should never have seene the Lord Jesus (but to his confusion) though he was a man every way as well informed as your selfe.

Yea, be might have pleaded as well as you, that he did it not out of passion, but that he had thoughts of the Church way before; for you may know that Paul was a member of the Church of the Jewes, which was erected by God, and was zealous for the Law, and mighty in knowledge being brought up at the feete of Gamaliel,* and also a free borne Roman,* and yet he neither knew Christ,* nor what Christ would have him to doe,* but hee thought other wayes of himselfe, or else he would not have persecuted the professors of the truth, but that hee imagined there was evill in the practise of the truth; even as you say you apprehend evill in the practise of Independancie, though they see it not that practise it, because (say you) they are ingaged in it, but it was ignorance in Paul, so to thinke, and so (at the best) it is ignorance in you. Therefore you have no neede to say, that you see more evill in it, then the Independants can doe, but you should rather have said you seeme to see, for you cannot see an evill where none is.

But you wish that the Independant Ministers, would consider what hath beene written.

I answer, Indeede (for my part) if their considerations be as mine, and though they consider it as I doe, without partialitie, yet they will finde nothing in it, to perswade them to lay aside all thoughts of setting up separated Assemblies (which hath beene plainely proved to be the way of God) much lesse that they should come, and grow into one body, and joyne in one way with you, so long as you have so foule a body (which you confesse you have) and your way so contrary to the way of Christ, being indeede away of your owne devising.

And touching the counsell of Mr Calvin to this purpose.

I say, If he should counsell, as you counsell, it would be to me but a as blast of breath; for we are to take the councell of the holy Ghost, by the mouth of Paul, which bids us follow him, as hee followes Christ.*

But you would have us to consider, what Paul requires in a Pastor, of which things you say, this is not the least, that hee ought not to be selfe-willed; that is (say you) to be adicted to his owne proper judgement.

I answer, I have considered this text already, and doe conceive, that this rule of Paul is broken by the Pope of Rome, and the Popes of England, which are adicted to their owne wills, and set up their own proper judgements for a Law; which evill and error Paul saw in his time, when he said, the mystery of iniquitie began then to worke.*

Moreover, I do acknowledge that it is a vertue in a good Pastor from his heart to feare contentions, and not to differ from his brethren, unlesse it be in cases greatly necessary, but what is all this which you have said to the matter in hand, you know Paul spake to the Churches planted in the order of Christs Gospell, and not by the order of the man of Sin, and therefore it will not help you to call them againe, to consider what they may enjoy in your Church, for I have proved it plainely before in my reply to your Answer to their third Reason, that a Saint of God can injoy no thing in your Church without sinne, and therefore what you thinke you have shewed before in your three first Reasons is nothing at all; for though you say it is but some circumstances that be wanting, about the manner and forme of Discipline. I tell you you want the substance, even Christ to be the head of your Churche, and have made you a head of Archbishops and Lord Bishops, which head is full of leprosic.

But here you have brought Mr. Calvin to crosse you shrewdly, and you would have us to beleeve him; and indeed with my heart I beleeve it, whether Mr. Calvin speake it or no; you say he affirmes that the Scriptures expresse the substance of discipline; this is very true; but in another place you say, that Calvin said, there is no expresse precept concerning this matter:* And the like you rehearse presently in your next words for you say he affirmeth, that the forme of exercising it, must be ordained by the Ministers for edification, because it is not prescribed by the Lord.

Doth not Clavin and you both crosse your selves here? hath Christ indeede written in his Word the substance of Discipline and not the forme? you would make (indeed) the substance of discipline without forme, and voide, even as the earth it selfe was, when darkenes was upon the face of the deepe: so you would have men conceive there is a substance, but they must have no rule to know where to finde it; for you say, the forme of exercising it, is not prescribed. Here you would make Christ wanting to his owne house, for we know that Moses had the forme of the house, as well as the substance of the house, and the forme of every Ordinance, with every, circumstance that was to be used, in and about Gods worship, and the forme was given unto Moses by God himselfe and Moses had not power to alter any thing in the forme, neither had any of the Ministers which came after him: but the wicked Priests did alter the forme, and Apostated from the truth of those Ordinances taught by Moses; even so the wicked Antichristians apostated from the forme of wholsome words given by Paul, which was to follow him as he followed Christ.

And also from the rule of our Saviour Christ given to all his Apostles, that they should teach the people what he commanded them, (Matth, 28. 20.) And this (you may see) was not onely in substance but in forme also, for Paul expresseth to the Corinthians, the very forme of breaking of bread, which he had received of the Lord Jesus;* and by this you may see you have given the holy Ghost the lie, even as Calvin also, affirming, that the forme of exercising it, is not presribed by the Lord; and therefore I would have you, (Mr. Edwards) to take the Counsell your selfe, that you give unto others, for it is very good counsell.

First, that you please not your selfe in your owne Opinions.

Secondly, that you be not so adicted to your owne judgement, but remember the danger that Calvin laies downe here, that a man being wedded to his owne Judgement, so soone as ever an Ocation offers it self, will be a Schismaticke; and I have told you already, that this was the first occasion of Schisme and Apostacie, from the truth of the Gospels worship, that being darke in their mindes, and judgeing the substance of Gods worship to be without forme; and as they them selves (so presuming) tooke upon them to prescribe a forme themselves, so they being wedded to their owne judgement, did Schisme from the truth of the Scripture.

Thus you say you have delivered your owne soule.

But to whom, or from what you have delivered it, I cannot tell.

But you say further: you hope the brethren, will withdraw their petitions, that they may not be reade in the honourable house of Commons, but, if they should be read (you say) you hope the House will cast them out.*

I Answer, That they should withdraw their Petitions, is but one of your vaine hopes, for they had more neede now to petion then ever they had, both to God and men, seeing such a Goliah as you, musters up so many forces against them.

But the later of these your vaine hopes, doth manifest the malice of your heart, in that you hope the house will cast their petitions out.

Are you so void of true piety towards that Honourable House? or judge you that House so void of common Reason? being as they are indeede the very Eyes of the whole land; the Eares of the whole land, and the Tongue of the whole land; yea the hand and power of the whole land: being so as I conceive in my simplicity, would you have them, I say to be blinde of one eye? and to looke upon the Petitions and complaints of some of the people of the land, and not upon all? would you have them so partiall? would you have them also deafe of one care? that they should not hearken to the cries and petitions, and complaints of all the Kings subjects, one as well as another? would you have them also so defective in their tongue, that they should not be for the praise of them that doe well, as well as for the punishment of evill doers? nay, seeing they are called Gods,* would you have their hands so shortned, that they should not once stretch them forth, to support and helpe the poore afflicted members of Jesus Christ? Then indeede you would have them very unlike unto Moses, even as unlike as your selves are unto Aaron.

Would you have this House to exercise their power upon persons before they have made due triall of the cause? (by hearing witnesses speake on both sides: truely (Mr. Edwards) if you would (as it appeareth plaine it is your minde,) then I will submit to the judgement of both the Houses of Parliament, whether you be not a man void of common Reason; for he is a foole that judgeth a matter before he know it.

And you are not onely void of Reason your selfe, but you would have the Parliament to be like you; for if the Parliament should judge a man before they heare his cause, they would be like the Court at Lambeth, which were used to sit in the high Priests Hall, judgeing matters without due triall.

Further, you say you are perswaded, that it will never be said of this Parliament, that they opened a doore for Toleration.

For Answer to this, I must tell you, that I conceive, they may receive a Petition, and yet not open a doore for Toleration; I meane for such a Toleration as you here speake of, for setting up Churches against Churches, for that is not the Toleration that we pleade for, but your evill conclusion.

And therefore you may pray, if you will, that that doore maybe kept shut.

And we will pray also that all doores may be kept shut, that will let any evills into the Kingdome in processe of time, least that any succeeding generations, should have cause to write in their Chronicles of this Parliament, as it was written of Naaman the Syrian; that is (as you say, (it will be said of them) but they granted a Toleration.

Moreover, we desire nothing at their hands, that may cast a darke shadow upon their glorious light.

But that which we desire, is liberty of conscience to practise Gods true worship in the land wherein we were borne, which will be no blemish to any Christian Magistrate to grant, nor for any Counsell of state to establish.

And therefore you should not have concluded this your Discourse against independancie, and against Toleration, before you had offered it to the triall before some lawfull Committee chosen by the Parliament, to heare both you and them; and then if you could have maintained your Churche of England (which you plead for) with your Synods, and Counsells, Ceremonies, and Booke-worship, Canons, and Sensures, Citations, Degradations, and Excommunications, with your Absolutions, to be founded upon the substance of that Worship and Discipline, which you say Calvin affirmeth, is expressed in the Scriptures, then you might with the more shew of honesty have admoninished the Parliament, to have cast out their Petitions, but till then you may lay your hand upon your mouth, and never for shame affirme, that the granting of Toleration unto us (to worship God, without molestation) will be setting up Churches against Churches.

Neither ought you to have concluded against them, before you had proved their way of worship to be contrary to the word of God, or not to have footing in his word (as yours hath not) for except you had done this, you have small cause to rejoyce in your thoughts, in respect of the accounts that you are to give about this contraversie; for your contraversie can be conceived at the best, to be but, the contraversie that Paul had, when he went unto Damascus which was a Contraversie against Christ* though Christ in his rich grace pardoned him, when hee had smitten him downe, and driven him out of himselfe, and made him to confesse, that he knew not Christ, in these words (where hee saith,) LORD WHO ART THOV, and further acknowledged that he knew not the will of Christ? by asking him (with these words) WHAT WILT THOV HAVE ME TO DOE? thus you may see, though the controversie was against Christ, yet Paul was reconciled to God the Father, by Iesus Christ the Sonne, and endued with the holy Ghost, which made him a Minister of the New Testament, which all his humane learning could not doe.

And Paul might have boasted that he was stirred up by the Spirit of God, against the way of Christ, as you boast, that you are stirred up by Gods Spirit against the way of Separation. But that would not have justified Paul, much lesse shall it justifie you; for Paul did that hee did out of a zeale to maintaine the Law of God. But yours is to maintaine the Law of Sinne, even the Law of Sathan. Paul persecuted those that he did conceive to be evill; but you persecute those that you acknowledge good men, and such as have beene active and famous for God.

And therefore you have no neede to boast of the Spirits enabling you all along, and that above your owne strength (as you declare) for it may plainely appeare (unto all men of understanding) that it was the very spirit of delusion.

And therefore, you may justly expect Censures and Reproaches (as you say you doe) because your way in this action was not pleasing to God.

But for my part, instead of censuring you, I would rather reprove you; and admonish you, rather than reproach you, and pray that God might turne you. And if God would be pleased to give you that reward of your labour, which hee gave unto Paul, even to strike you downe, and to make you to heare his voyce, and learne to know him, and what he would have you to doe; then it would turne much to the praise of God, and to the comfort of your poore soule, if you be a chosen vessell unto him, (which is the thing you pretend you aime at) and then you shall be sure to gaine truth, and love and peace, and holinesse in all your after discourses, when you shall speake with a new tongue, and expresse the language of Canaan.

And now (Mr. Edwards) for conclusion of the whole, I doe here affirme, that if upon the sight of this Booke, you shall conceive that I have either misconstrued your words, or accused you without ground (necessarily drawne from your owne speeches) or that I have mistaken the sence of any Scripture, that I have quoted in this Booke, or that I have not answered you directly to the point (by any oversight) Then chuse you sixe men, (or more, if you please) and I will chuse as many, and if you will we will agree upon a Moderator; and trie it out in a faire discourse, & peradventure save you a labour from publishing your large Tractates, which you say you intend to put out in Print against the whole way of Separation; and if it can be made appeare that (in any of these particulars) I have missed it, I will willingly submit, But if you overcome me, your conquest will not be great, for I am a poore worrne, and unmeete to deale with you.

But if you doe give another onset, before you accept of a parse, (seeing I have offered you conditions of peace) the world will judge you an unreasonable man, and you shall never have the day.

But if you will (say your quarrell is only against those Ministers, that justifie your Church and Ministry, and worship) and can prove that the Minsters of Holland and New England doe generally justifie the Church of England, and the Ministery of the Church of England, and the worship instituted by the Church of England: I say if they thus far justifie you (as I have here specified) then will I freely acknowledge (when I heare them speak it) that I was mistaken concerning them (yet the case in controversie stands still to be tried between you and me) but I do otherwise conceive of them for the present, because I am credibly informed, that they doe, generally and publikely, renounce the power by which they were called to their office of Ministry, in and by the Church of England; some of them affirming that they have stood Ministers too long under such a false power; others confessing here in publike, that it was their sinne, that they had not revealed so much to the people before they went away, with many the like expressions, which I can prove, if wee come face to face, which maketh it appeare to me (for the present) that though they preach in the Assemblies met together by publike authority, yet they judge themselves to be Ministers sent of God to separate the precious from the vile, and that though they have not an outward mediate calling (seeing they have cast it off, because it was false) yet they have an inward immediate calling, as all the Ministers of God had in former time, which were able to unfould the Misteries of the Scripture, though they had neither calling by man, nor by the will of man but by the holy Ghost.

And I hope these men, (of whom I speake) will never returne to serve God before the Idols, nor preach for wages, as Balaam did, but still stand fast in the liberty wherein Christ hath set them; Seeing they cave bast off the grievous yoke of Antichrist, separating betweene the precious and the vile, sitting men for the Lords building, that so they may goe up to Ierusalem by troupes.

This is my charity towards them, though I know them not by face, and I thinke I may boldly say that none of them knowes me.

Esay 41. 21. Stand to your cause, saith the Lord, bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob.

Esay 5-8. Take counsell together, yet it shall be brought to nought, pronounce a Decree, yet it shall not stand, for GOD is with us.

FINIS.

Endnotes

 [* ] Deut. 32, &illegible; 2 King. 8. 53.

 [* ] Gen. 4. 14. 15. 16.

 [c ] Gen. 4. 3.

 [d ] Mat. 24. 38. 39. 1 Pet. 3. 20.

 [e ] Gen. 7. 1.

 [f ] Ver. 21, 22, 23.

 [g ] Gen. 12. 1.

 [h ] Exo. 3. 7. 8. 9. 10. Chap. 6. 26. 27.

 [i ] And 12. 42.

 [k ] Num 16. 12, 13, 14.

 [l ] Ver. 21. 24, 25, 26.

 [m ] Ver. 35.

 [n ] Ver. 31, 32, 33.

 [* ] Ver. 5.

 [* ] Deut. 28. 9. 10.

 [p ] Ier. 51. 6.

 [q ] Ier. 3. 12. Hos. 11, 7.

 [r ] Rev. 1. 3.

 [s ] Rev. 18. 4.

 [* ] Amos 7. 12. 13.

 [* ] Gen. 10, 8, 9.

 [* ] Eester 3. 8. 6. 6.

 [* ] Neh. 6.

 [a ] Tit 3. 10.

 [b ] Rev. 1. 20.

 [c ] 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15. 16. 17.

 [d ] Rev. 14. 9, 10, 11. 12.

 [e ] Chap. 18. 4.

 [* ] 1 Tim. 6.

 [* ] For this see the Reply to his Answer to their third Reason for Toleration.

 [* ] For this see his Book pag. 5. 5.

 [* ] Esay 4. 2. 8.

 [b ] 1 Tim. 2. 1. 2.

 [c ] Pro. 15. 8.

 [* ] &illegible; 4. 5.

 [* ] Matth. 6. 5.

 [* ] Ver. 7. 8.

 [c ] Rom. 8. 15.

 [d ] Ioh. 14. 26.

 [* ] For this see the third part of his Answer to their second Reason against Toleration, pag. 30.

 [* ] 2 Tim. 3. 5.

 [* ] For this see his fift Reason against Toleration. pag. 28. lin. 12. 13.

 [* ] Pag. 34.

 [* ] Pag. 34.

 [* ] Gen. 45. 24.

 [* ] Pro. 18. 19.

 [* ] Gen. 50. 20.

 [* ] 1 Ioh. 2. 19.

 [* ] Ioh. 6. 66. 67.

 [* ] I pray thee (good Reader) take notice, that here I acknowledge an oversight (in taking Mr. Edwards his eleventh Reason, to be a second tenth Reason) it was through my neglect, in not looking into his Errata.

 [* ] For this reade the Answer to his third Reason against Independancie.

 [* ] See the Reply to the sixth part of his Answer to this their following Reason.

 [* ] In the Second Part of his second Reason against toleration, pag. 24. In his sixth Reason against toleration pag. 29. and the third part of his Answer to their second Reason for toleration.

 [* ] Pag. 43. lin. 16. 17.

 [* ] Pag. 45.

 [* ] Rev. 12. 14

 [* ] Verse 16.

 [* ] Pag. 46. E. &illegible;

 [* ] What it is that bred the Separates.

 [* ] Pag. 49. &illegible; 9. 10.

 [* ] Pag. 50. lin 23. to lin. 29.

 [* ] Cant. 1. 7.

 [* ] Pag. 48. l. 23. 24.

 [* ] Acts 11. 24.

 [* ] Acts 6. 5. 8. 10.

 [* ] Ioh. 9. 31.

 [* ] When Stephen Gardiner harped upon unitie, unitie: yea Sir (said Latimer) but in Veritie, not in Popery: better is a Diversities &illegible; Veritie in Popery.

 [* ] Rev. 21. 19.

 [* ] Pag. 49. lin. 31. 2.

 [* ] Pag. 52. lin. 33. 34.

 [* ] For this see his eigth Reason against Toleration. pag. 32. lin. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

 [* ] Pag. 26.

 [* ] Acts 8. 3.

 [* ] Act. 21. &illegible;

 [* ] Ver. 28.

 [* ] Ver. 8.

 [* ] Ver. 10.

 [* ] Cor. 11. 1.

 [* ] Thes. 2. 7.

 [* ] For this see Reasons against Independancie, pag. 5. lin. 12. &illegible;

 [* ] 1 Cor. &illegible; 23.

 [* ] For this see his Book pag. 55.

 [* ] Psal. &illegible; 1. 6.

 [* ] Acts 9. 4. 5.

 


8.5. John Hare, The Marine Mercury (6 January, 1642)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Hare, The Marine Mercury. Or a true relation of the strange appearance of a Man-Fish about three miles within the River of Thames, having a Musket in one hand, and a Petititon in the other. Credibly Reported by six Saylors, who both saw and talkt with the Monster, whose names here following are inserted. Whereunto is added a Relation how Sir Simon Heartley with the Company gave battell to a company of Rebels, and slew 500, tooke 4. Colours, and routed 1500 more: this being performed on the 6. of Ianuary. 1641. The Saylors names. Nicholas Truderow. Humfrey Hearnshaw. Sim. Seamanlt. Iosias Otter. Alexander Watarrat. Tim Bywater. Written by John Hare, Gent. Printed in the yeare, 1642.

Estimated date of publication

6 January, 1642.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 60; Thomason E. 131. (26.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The strange Relation of the appearance of a Man-fish armed, comming towards London.

Reported by six Saylors, who conversed with him the best part of an houre.

THere is scarce any man of noble and generous quality, (if they would strive to be compleat in the highest degree) but may be perfected by travell, which is the true salt and season of a Gentleman. Now there is none so qualified, and hath seen the wonders of the deep, that can thinke this story impossible, for there are not so many strange creatures by land, but there are sarre stranger by water; nor any resemblance of any beast upon earth, but the sea produces the like for shape and lineaments, which cannot admit of the least contradiction, but to the ignorant, and those that will beleeve no further then their weake fight can discerne.

This story was written by a Gentleman from the mouthes of these men, which certainly could not be deluded by any shadow or phantasme, being hardy and spiritfull persons, though of a coorse and rough conversation; the sense and truth of the relation is not altered: as they did deliver it, it is here set downe, onely drest in better language for the delight of the Reader: which was thus.

The third day after the guarding of the worthy Members to Westminster, being the 14. of this instant month, after the City by land, and the Sailors by water had expressed their deare affection to the noblest of Assemblies, the Saylors comming off with good approbation, and having satisfaction in the businesse they expected, departed to their severall employments. Now six of them being in a shipboat some league and a half within the mouth of the river of Thames, this Monster appeared. At the first sight they were much dismayd, but afterward they taking heart (some of them having beene at seasights) made them the more adventurous: for the approach of this Monster was very terrible; having broad fiery eyes, haire blacke and curled, his brest armed with shining skales, so that by the reflection of the Sunne they became so blinde and dazled, that hee might have taken or slaine every man of them, he having a musket in one hand, and a large paper in the other hand, which seemed to them a Petition.

By which posture they did imagine that what he could not get by intreaty, he would by force or fear attaine, but after they had passed some words with this man-fish, he seemed rather an Angel sent to guard this Kingdome, then an enemy to hurt us, for he shewed himselfe so debonarie and full of curtesie as if he had beene tutored in the absolutest Court in Christendome; telling them he came inspired by providence for the good and flourishing estate of this Kingdome, and the armed hand he advanced, was to put us in minde of our security, which hath beene the overthrow of the famous Monarchies, and in the other hand was the intelligence of all the dangers and plots of forraine Princes against us; they being illiterate men could not understand many other high expressions that hee pleased to deliver himselfe in, which here is lost because they understood not bracagraphy, yet they humbly confessed their ignorance, and withall their occupation, and told him they were sailors, but they humbly intreated him to keepe on his course towards London, with his Embassy to the Worthies of the land, for they did not thinke themselves worthy to give him audience; he with a serene and cheerfull humility answered, we are all Courtiers to Naptune, and as the cavalleers to land Princes do ride great horses to shew the generosity of their spirit, and activity of body, so doe we mount the equatick beast of our elements, as the whale, sword-fish and thrasher, which last are kept on purpose to ride our lea stages; at which word (by the motion of his lower parts) he sprang from them with that violence, that no artificiall motion could bee so swift, for by some strange fish he was carried under water which they could not perceive, he went from them about a league, and returned in lesse then two minutes, telling them that our barbarey Roebuck and Hart were but meer Dromedaries to that hee rode on, and that within halfe an houre he could be in the remotest parts of the Ocean for the discovery of the most intricate designes that were in agitation: they being all of them in a deep silence, did not know what to say or thinke of him, whether he were a deity or a mortall creature, he perceived them astonished, gently lifted up himselfe, and with a smiling countenance, said he would deliver us something for our instruction, then he read to them out of his paper this newes.

That within six minutes he came from the narrow feas from the French fleet which was intended for Catalonia in the Spanish dominions, but they had rather come for little England if once these botches of distractions would run and burst into confusion.

He told them also of a letter he had to shew from the French Generall, to the King of France, of his hopes of the enterprise, with the doubts & encoragements, but because it was in the originall, and they no linguists, he spared his further relation till his comming to London.

That a mighty fleet of Turkes had lately met with a Spanish fleet that came for Ireland, which had beaten the Spaniard, and hindred them in that expedition; so that if a timely aid be sent, the kingdome may be easily recovered from those bloudy rebells.

Having ended this newes, he sprang from us as before, steering his course directly towards London.

A Relation how Sir Simon Heartly with his Company, gave battell to a company of Rebels and slew 500. tooke 4. Colours, and routed 1500. more, this being performed on the 6. of Ian. 1641.

ON our Epiphany last, being 6. Ian. 1641. Sir Simon Heartley with his company chasing a parcel of Rebells neare Monno, his spies giving him intelligence no aid could suddenly assist them, set upon the Rebells, where for foure houres there was a hot skirmish, and on both sides many men fell; but Sir Simon so bravely behaved himselfe that day, that his men plaid so hot on the Rebells having the advantage of the winde, that in the end they forced the Rebells to leave their workes, and at that time there war 500. of the Rebells slaine and taken, and about the number of 1500. utterly routed, also 4. of the Rebells Colours taken in this fight; this by the providence of God was performed to the damage of the Rebells, and the encouragement of the Protestants.

FINIS.

 


8.6. Anon., A Question Answered (21 April, 1642)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., A Question Answered: How Laws are to be understood, and obedience yeelded? Necessary for the present state of things, Touching the Militia. Printed for the good of the Commonweale.

Estimated date of publication

21 April, 1642.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 101; Thomason 669.f.6 (7.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

Necessary for the present state of things, Touching the Militia.

Question.

NOw in our extreame distractions, when forraigne forces threaten, and probably are invited, and a malignant and Popish party at home offended? The Devill hath cast a bone, and rais’d a contestation between the King and Parliament touching the Militia, His Majestie claimes the disposing of it to be in him by right of Law; The Parliament saith rebus sic stantibus, and nolenti Rege, the Ordering of it is in them?

Answer.

WHich Question, may receive its solution by this distinction. That there is in Laws an equitable, and a litterall sence. His Majesty (let it be granted) is intrusted by Law with the Militia, but it’s for the good and preservation of the Republique, against Forraigne Invasions or domesticke rebellions. For it cannot be supposed that the Parliament would ever by Law intrust the King with the Militia against themselves, or the Commonwealth, that intrusts them to provide for their weale, not for their woe. So that when there is certain appearance or grounded suspition, that the Letter of the Law shall be improved against the equity of it (that is, the publicke good, whether of the body reall or representative) then the Commander going against its equity, gives liberty to the Commanded to refuse obedience to the Letter: for the Law taken abstract from its originall reason and end, is made a shell without a kernell, a shadow without a substance, and a body without a soule. It is the execution of Laws according to their equity and reason, which (as I may say) is the spirit that gives life to Authority, the Letter kills.

Nor need this equity be expressed in the Law, being so naturally implyed and supposed in all Laws that are not meerely Imperiall, from that analogie which all bodies Politicke hold with the Naturall; whence all government and Governours borrow a proportionable respect; And therfore when the Militia of an Army is committed to the Generall, it is not with any expresse condition, that he shall not turn the mouths of his Cannons against his own Souldiers, for that is so naturally and necessarily implyed, that its needlesse to be expressed, insomuch as if he did attempt or command such a thing against the nature of his trust and place, it did ipso facto estate the Army, in a right of disobedience, except we thinke that obedience binds Men to cut their owne throats, or at least their companions.

And indeed if this distinction be not allowed, then the legall and mixt Monarchy is the greatest Tiranny, for if Laws invest the King in an absolute power, and the letter be not controled by the equity, then whereas Other Kings that are absolute Monarcks and rule by will, and not by Law, are Tyrants perforce. Those that rule by Law and not by will, have hereby a Tiranny confer’d upon them legally, and so the very end of Laws, which is to give bounds and limits to the exorbitant wills of Princes, is by the Lawes themselves disapointed, for they hereby give corrobaration (and much more Iustification to an arbitrary Tyranny, by making it legall, not assumed; which Laws are ordained to crosse nor countenance: and therefore is the letter (where it seems absolute) alwaies to receive quallification from the equity, else the foresaid absurdity must follow.

Printed for the good of the Commonweale.

 


8.7. John Marsh, The Great Question concerning the Militia (30 September, 1642)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Marsh, AN ARGUMENT OR, DEBATE IN LAW: OF THE GREAT QVESTION CONCERNING THE MILITIA; As it is now settled by ORDINANCE of both the HOUSES of PARLIAMENT. By which, it is endeavoured, to prove the Legalitie of it, and to make it warrantable by the fundamentall Laws of the Land. In which, Answer is also given to all Objections that do arise, either directly, or collaterally concerning the same. All which is referred to the judicious Reader. By J. Marsh C. L.
LONDON: Printed by Tho. Paine, and M. Simmons, for Tho. Underhill, at the Bible in Wood-street, 1642.

Estimated date of publication

30 September, 1642.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 175; Thomason E. 119 (13.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

TO THE READER.

Courteous Reader,

THat which I framed for my own private satisfaction onely, in these distracted times, in which every man (that resolves not to stand Neuter) ought to have his conscience poysed by good grounds and principles, lost that it suffer shipwrack in the conclusion; I do here (though unwillingly) present to the publique view; in which weak and poore indeavour, I have borrowed some of the Parliaments grounds to exspatiate my self upon, that I might the better convince thy iudgement, and mine own: but the greater part are mine; which I hope will not blast the rest, nor make it unfruitfull to thee; but rather more fully inform, satisfie and convince thee of the truth of the Parliaments assertions: and to this end I have not used any affected style, but have (to the utmost of my endeavour) invested the Law with its own plainnesse and integrity: for I have alwayes raised this conclusion to my self, that where I look for words, there I expect least Law, which is confirmed unto thee, as a truth, in these dayes. Now Reader, shortly to conclude this, (for the Work doth not deserve a Preface or Epistle) if happily there may be any thing in it, that may merit thy more serious consideration, and make thee a true Subiect to the King, by being faithfull to the Parliament; I shall expect no greater a reward of my labour, then that, confidently beleeving that the issue of it will be, thine, and my happinesse, Farewell.

Thine to love and serve thee,

J. Marsh.

AN ARGVMENT IN MAINTENANCE OF THE MILITIA, Setled by Ordinance of Parliament.

THe generall Question is but shortly this; Whether the Militia, as it is now setled by both the Houses of Parliament, be warrantable by Law, or not?

The Case, with the Circumstances, upon which this generall Question is stated, depends upon these two Quæres.

1. Whether the King by his Prerogative hath the sole and onely power of ordering and disposing of the Militia of his Kingdome or not? Admitting that he hath: then the next and maine scruple is:

2. Whether both the Houses of Parliament, in time of imminent danger, (the King refusing to settle the Militia for the defence and securitie of his people) may by an Ordinance of Parliament, without his Majesties consent, settle the Militia, and put the Kingdome into a posture of defence or not?

1. For the first point, I conceive very clearly, that the King by his Prerogative, warrantable by the Lawes of the Land, performing the trust reposed in him, hath the onely power of disposing of the Militia of this Kingdome; and therefore I shall not debate this, so much out of scruple or doubt, as to give satisfaction to the unlearned; and I shall prove it in reason thus: The King is Caput Reipublicæ, & pater patriæ, that is, the head of the Common-wealth, and Father of his Countrey; and hath this great trust committed to him by God, and his people, of governing of them in peace and happinesse, by maintaining and defending of their Religion, Lawes, and Liberties; which, that he may be the more obliged to doe, he taketh a solemne Oath at his Coronation, that he will doe and performe this, according to the trust reposed in him; the due execution whereof, being of so high consequence to this Kingdome, and of so great difficultie to himselfe, and therefore not to be executed without great care, circumspection, and trouble; the Lawes and Constitutions of this Realme, hath in favour and ayde of his Majestie (who is intended alwayes to be imployed and negotiated Circa ardua regni, about the high things of the Kingdome) allowed unto him, many prerogatives, priviledges, and exemptions, above all his Subjects. Among which, I take this in our Case to be one; for as our Religion, Lawes, and Liberties, are committed in trust to the King, so are our lives also: which he is bound to defend aswell by the materall sword, if occasion be, as by the sword of Justice, and therefore as it is well knowne, all prosecutions by way of Indictment against any man, for the taking away of the life of another, are at the suite of the King, and the King onely can pardon the offence, and no other. For he alone hath the charge of the lives of his Subjects committed to him, and this is such an inseperable trust, that the King cannot grant this over to another, as it is resolved in 20.&illegible; H. 7. fo. 8. a. H. 7. where it is said, That a grant of power to pardon Felons, by the King to another, is not good, for that it is a prerogative annexed to the Crowne, and cannot be severed: But here it is not to be understood that no prerogative of the King can be severed from the Crowne, for some may, as I shall afterwards shew, and that by grant of the King too: but that this among others, is such a prerogative as cannot be severed, and the reason of this, is, as I conceive, for that the life of a man is of so high and puissant nature, that none lesse then God, or the King, ought to have interest and power in; and though the Common-wealth loose a member, it is the King onely who looseth a Subject, and therefore the killing of a man, is said in the Indictment to be against his Crowne and dignitie, and not against the Common-wealth; for though mediately it be an offence against the Common-wealth too: yet it is a more neare and immediate offence against the King: for that he is intrusted with the lives of his Subjects.

Now as the King is bound to defend his Subjects by the Law, so in like manner he is bound to defend and protect them by the Sword, if occasion be, as I have said before, from all danger, both of forraigne and domesticke enemies. And therefore, as there is a Leigeance, that is, a faithfull and true obedience of the Subject due to his Soveraigne, as it is interpreted in the 7.Rep. Calvins Rep. Calvines case: So there is a protection due from the Soveraigne to the Subject; for he ought not onely regere, to rule, but also Protegere subditos suos, to protect his Subjects.20. H. 7. 8. So as betweene the Soveraigne and Subject, there is Duplex & reciprocum ligamen, that is, a double and reciprocall bond; Quia sicut subditus regi tenetur, ad obedientiam,10. R. 2. ca. &illegible; it a Rex subdito tenetur ad protectionem, for as the Subject is bound to obey the King, so the King is bound to protect his Subject; and therefore in 20. H. 7. it is holden, that there is a Liege or Leigeance betweene the King and the Subject:11. R. 2. ca. &illegible; and Fortescue cap. 13. saith, Rex ad tutelam legis, corporum & bonorum erectus est, that is, he is erected King, to defend the Law, the bodies, and goods of his Subjects: and in the Acts of Parliament of 10. R. 2. 11. R. 2. and 14. H. 8. &c. Subjects are called Leige people. And in the Acts of Parliament of 34. H. 8. and 35. H. 8. &c. the King is called the Liege Lord of his Subjects;14. H. 8. ca. &illegible; and with this agreeth Master Skene in his Booke de expositione verborum, that Leigeance is the mutuall bond & obligation betwixt the King and his Subjects, by which Subjects are called his leige Subjects,34. H. 8. ca. &illegible; for that they are bound to obey and serve him: and he is called their Leige Lord, for that he ought to maintaine and defend them: Wherefore it is truely said, that Protectio trahit subjectionem, & subjectio protectionem,35. H. 8. ca. &illegible; Protection draweth subjection, and subjection protection.

By all which it is manifest, as also by the Oath of the King, taken at his Coronation, lately published by the Parliament, that the King is bound to protect the lives & liberties of his Subjects, so long as the Subject is obedient to the King; for protection and leigeance are relatives, and have a necessary and reciprocall dependance the one upon the other: and this is the reason that we say that a man outlawed, is out of the protection of the King; so that heretofore a man outlawed was said to have Caput Lupinum, that is, a Wolses head: so that any man might then have killed him, as Fleta saith, and other old Books:Fleta. lib. &illegible; cap. 27. because that by his disobedience to the King, he had deprived himselfe of the benefit of the regall and legall protection. I doe not say, that if the King withdraw his regall protection from his Subjects, that his Subjects may withhold their obedience from their Soveraigne: yet I am certaine, that the Books before cited imply as much. Besides, reason will arme every man thus farre, as to conclude, that the cause and ground of his obedience, is his Soveraignes protection, and therefore if his Soveraigne withdraw the one, he may deny the other. Againe, denying to protect his Subjects, is a plaine refusall to be ruled by Law, and this, as Bracton saith, makes him a Tyrant no King, and my obedience is due to him, as a King, not as a Tyrant. But I passe this over, as a matter of so great consequence at this time, considering the bad principles of many men, that I had rather offend in withholding of my judgement, then in publishing of it.

But yet more fully, that the King is bound to protect his Subjects, F. N. B. is expresse.F. N. B. fo. 232. Nota, saith the Booke, that the King is bound of right by the Lawes, to defend his Subjects, and their goods and chattels, lands and tenements, and therefore by the Law, every lawfull Subject is taken to be within the protection of the King, and if he be put out of protection for his offence, then every man may doe with him as with an enemy of the King: Here note, that the Subject cannot loose his protection due to him by his Soveraigne, but by his owne default.

F. N. B. fo. 113. a.And in F. N. B. fol. 113. a. it is there said, that the King ought of right to save and defend his Realme, as well against the Sea, as against enemies, that it be not surrounded or wasted: and to provide remedy for it; and also to provide that his Subjects have their passage throughout the Realme by all high wayes in safeguard. And this is warranted by the Commission of Sewers, which is directed by the King to Commissioners, to inquire of, &c. and to heare and determine all faults and breaches of Walls, Ditches, &c. Sea-bankes, &c. in the beginning of which Commission, the fractions of the Walls, or Sea-bankes, is cited, and in the body of it, the King saith, Nos pro eo quod ratione dignitatis nostræ regiæ ad providendum salvationi regni nostri circumquaque sumus astrcti, volentes in &illegible; parte congruum & festinum remedium adhiberi, assignavimiu vos, &c. Here the King himselfe saith expressely, in this Commission, that he is every way bound, by reason of his royall function, and Kingly office, Providere salvationi regni sui, that is, to provide safety for his Kingdome. And is the Law thus, that the King is bound to protect and defend his Subjects, Per mare, per terras? By the Sea, from all Pyrates and Robbers, as also from the invasions of forraigne enemies: and by the Land, from any domesticke dangers, either by inbred rebellions, or civill Commotions? Why then the Conclusion that I raise upon these premisses, is but this; That it is consonant and agreeable to all reason, that the King executing of the trust reposed in him, should not be denied the means by which he may respond that great confidence placed in him, by his owne care and fidelitie: and God forbid, that we should require the due execution of this great function, of his Majesties part, and yet that we should withdraw from him the meanes, by which he should performe it; for if so, to be a King, would be sarre worse, then an Ægyptian servitude.

Wherefore I conceive that it stands with all the justice and equity in the world, that the King (who hath so great a charge upon him, that greater cannot be, by which, he, as Vicarius Dei, that is, Gods Vicar, as Bracton speaketh, is obliged to defend the persons and property of his Subjects) should have all the Castles, Forts and strong holds, and all the Ports and Havens at his rule and disposition, and that generally he should have the ordering of the Militia throughout the Realm: so that by this means he may be inabled to discharge that great trust that is committed to him (without which he cannot be) and at the last to render a just account to God, of his Stewardship.

And this certainly Bracton li. 2. de acquirendo rerum dominio,Bract. l. 2. c. 2. &illegible; intends, when he saith, that the King, Habes ea quæ sunt pacis, ut populus sibi traditus, in pace sileat & quiescat, &c. that is, he hath those things, which belong to peace, that he may govern his people committed to his charge in peace and quietnesse. For as the King hath ordinariam jurisdictionem, that is, ordinary jurisdiction, as Bracton saith before, and this to govern his Subjects according to Law and right: so, Habet ea quæ pacis sunt; that is, not onely the Law to maintain peace among his Subjects: but also, Ea quæ belli sunt, all those things, which conduce to the protecting and defending of his Subjects from any forrein invasion, or domesticke danger, or otherwise he could not possibly maintain peace according to the saying of Bracton, and as by his Oath he is bound.

The King by the Law hath this Prerogative allowed unto him, that he onely may proclaime warre, and he onely can establish peace among his people, as the 7. Rep. is: why then I argue thus,7. Rep. fo. 25. &illegible; It is a greater prerogative to have power to proclaim warre: then it is, to have the onely means to maintain it: and therefore it is not to be conceived, that the Law, that would allow the King the greater power, would deny him the lesse. For, Qui majora concedit, minor a non denegabit: He that granteth the greater, will not deny the lesse. Again, to allow the King power to proclaime warre, and to deny him the means to maintain warre, were absurd, and the Law will not admit of any absurditie. Wherefore I conceive, for these reasons also, that the King by the Law, hath likewise this prerogative of the sole ordering and disposing of the Militia of the Kingdom.

Now to conclude this point, I shall paralell this case, to one case onely in the Law,4. Rep. fo. 3. &illegible; Mittons &illegible; and that is to Mittons case in the 4. Rep. where the case is thus: Queen Elizabeth by her Letters Patents under the great Sçal, granted the Office of the Clerk of the County Court of the County of Somerset, to Mitton, with all Fees, &c. for terme of his life: and after the Queen constituted Arthur Hopton Esquire Sheriffe of the same County, who interrupted Mitton, claiming this Office, as incident to his Office of Sheriffe, and upon this he appointed a Clerk himself of the County Court; and here the sole question was, whether this grant by the Queen, were good, or not? And it was adjudged upon solemne debate, that it was not, and the principall reason given wherefore the grant was nought, was, because that great inconveniences might follow to Sheriffes, who are great and ancient Officers and Ministers of Justice, if such grants should be of validity, for that there is great trust reposed in them, for which they are responsible, as it is there said: whereupon it is concluded, that Law, and reason requires, that Sheriffes who are publick Officers and Ministers of justice, and who have an office of so great eminencie, confidence, perill and charge, that they ought to have all rights appertaining to their office. And in this case there is cited another case, to this purpose, Mich. 39. & 40. of the Queen resolved by all the Judges of England, as my Lord Coke saith, that the grants of the custodies of Goales, of the Counties, either by King H. 8. or afterwards, were utterly void: and the like reason is given in this case, at in Mittons case: for that custodies of Goales belong to the office of Sheriffe, who being immediate Officer to the Courts of the King, must answer for escapes, and shall be subject to amerciaments, if he hath not the body in Court upon processe to him directed, &c. and therefore it is reason, that he should put in such keepers of the said Goals; for whom he should answer,&illegible; 4. E. 3. c. 10. according to the purvieu of the Act of 14. E. 3. For otherwise against the rule of reason and equitie, Alius offendes, alius plectitur: that is, one man should offend, another should be punished. Now if the Law be thus, in these cases, that you shall not take away these offices from the Sheriffe, who is an Officer of trust, and onely chargeable for any misdemeanor, in the executing of the same; for that by this means, you should disable him to execute his Office, according to the confidence reposed in him, and yet should punish him for the not doing of his duty; which should be against all reason: à fortiori, I say in this case, you shall not deny the King, who hath the greatest Office of trust, and charge, that can be, the means and way to perform this trust, and to undergo this charge, which cannot be otherwise done, then by allowing of the King this prerogative (so long as he doth perform the trust that runs along with it) of having the sole disposing and ordering of the Militia of his Kingdom.

And without question Bracton when he saith, that the King hath Gladium materiale, that is, the materiall sword, can intend nothing else by this, but Gladium belli, which is the Militia, and gladium by a Synecdoche, may well comprehend and be set pro omnibus rebus milititaribus, that is, for all things military; And it is usuall in holy Writ, when God threatens the heavy judgement of warre upon any Nation, to do it under the notion and expression of a sword, by this intending, Bellum, that is, warre, with all its sad effects. Wherefore I conclude this point, that the King hath this prerogative allowed unto him by the Law: for these preceding reasons. 1. For that it were inconvenient for the King, who by the Law is bound to protect and defend his subjects, if he should not have this power. 2. For that the Law hath given unto him a greater prerogatiue, and therefore will not deny him the lesse: and thirdly and lastly, for that it would be absurd, that the King should have power to proclaime warre, but not to maintain it.

For the second question, which is, as I conceive, much more difficult,Second part. then the former, and which is the great doubt and dilemma of the time, which is but thus: whether the two Houses of Parliament, the Kingdom being in imminent danger, and the King refusing to put it into a posture of defence, may by their Ordinance, without the consent of the King, settle the Militia, and put the Kingdom into a posture of defence, or not?

And I do conceive, under favour, in some clearnesse, that they may, and that in so doing, they have done no more then what is warrantable by the Law. And this I ground in the first place upon the imminent danger, and extreame necessity, that the kingdom is in: and therefore though it should be admitted, that they could not do it, at another time, yet I conceive that by reason of the necessity, it is warranted by the Law for them to do it at this time.

It is a rule in our Law, first cited in Bracton,Bract. fo. 247. a. 10. Rep. fo. 61. a. and remembred in the 10. Rep. that illud quod alias licitum non est, necessitas facit licitum, & necessitas inducit privilegium, quod jure privatur. In time of necessitie, illegall acts, are made legall: and things utterly against Law, justifiable; Upon this rule I might multiply cases, but because I do not affect, via srita obambulare, to go in the common road, therefore I shall onely put some of the most materiall cases, which I find to this purpose, and the others I shall omit.

In Pl. Com. it is said, that when Laws or Statutes are made,Pl. Com. fo. 13. b. yet there are some things, which are excepted, and forseprised out of the provision of them, by the Law of reason, though that they are not expressed by words. As breaking of a prison is Felony in a prisoner himself by the Statute De frangentibus prisonam: yet if the prison be burnt, and they which are in, break the prison for salvation of their lives, this shall be excused by the Law of reason, and yet the words of the Statute are against it.

And 14. H. 7. Jurors who were sworn upon the issue,14. H. 7. fo. 29. and by the Law ought not to depart, untill they are agreed of their Verdict, for fear of a great tempest departed, and severed themselves: and it was there held that they should not be amerced, and that their verdict afterwards was good. And this was thus holden (saith the book) for the necessity of the chance; but otherwise they should have been grievously punished. So by the Law, for the salvation of my own life, I may kill another. And as the Law makes that lawfull, in case of necessity, which otherwise would not be lawfull, when it concerns any mans private: so à fortiori,&illegible; H. 8 Dyer. &illegible; 36. b. 8. E &illegible; 23. Br &illegible; 45. when it concerneth the Common-weal, and therefore as the book is in 29. H. 8. Dyer, a man may justifie the making of Bulwarks, in another mans soyl, without licence; and the razing of a house which burns, for safeguard of the houses of the neighbours. So it is if the Sheriffe pursue a Felon to a house, and for to have the Felon, he breaketh the doore of the house, this is justifiable. So in 13. H. 8. the inhabitants of a Citie in time of warre, if they conceive that the Suburbs may endanger the taking thereof, may lawfully burn or destroy the suburbs,13. H. 8. 16. &illegible; E. 4. 35 b. for the Towns or Cities preservation, and the common safetie. And in these cases, necessity, and the good of the republick, maketh that lawfull, which otherwise would not be lawfull.

It is a certain rule, that all Laws ought to receive an equitable and favourable construction, according as opportunitie and the necessity of the case, administers occasion: for, Summum jus, est summa injuria: that is, over strict observance of the Law, may sometimes be unlawfull. And à fortiori, they shall receive such a construction, where it concerns the Common-wealth: and accordingly the Judges in all ages, as they ought, so they have alwayes made such interpretation and declaration of the Laws, that the Common-wealth should not be prejudiced. And this is the reason of these cases, which have been often adjudged, that if a man bind himself, that he will not exercise his trade, or that he will not manure his land, or that he will not marry, that the Obligation in these cases is void, for that it is against the weal publike.

And this is the reason also, that hath made the Judges alwayes to adjudge all the Grants of the King, of Monopolies, or Impositions upon the Subject, without Act of Parliament, to be against the Law, for that they were against the good of the Common-wealth,&illegible; H. 3. ca. 29. and libertie of the Subject. And this is grounded upon Magna Charta, which saith, Quod nullus libor. homo, &c. that no free-man shall be taken and imprisoned, or be disseised of his Free-hold or liberties, but by lawfull judgement of his Peers, or by the Law of the land.

And if the Law he such, that the King by such grants, which are against Law, and the weal publick, cannot take away my free-hold or livelihood from me, but that such grants shall rather be adjudged to be void, (against the opinion of Bracton who saith, De chartis Regiis & factis regum, non di bent,Bract. fo. 34. &illegible; b. 2. nec possunt justiciarii, nec privatæ personæ disturbare: that is, of the Kings Charters, and his deeds, neither Justices, not private persons, may, or ought to dispute: which clearly is against the known and established Law at this day) why then certainly, it will follow, that if the King, either by action, or omission, go about to endanger the weal publick, and endeavour the destruction of it, which ex consequenti, must of necessity bring ruine to every individuall person of it: that in such case, those who are intrusted with the common good, (as the Parliament at this time is) may by all meanes possible, indeavour the preservation of it: but I doe not here intend by violent opposing or deposing of his sacred Majestie, of which I shall speake a word afterwards, but by setling of the Kingdome, into such a state and condition, as our sage Parliament hath now done, that it may be able to defend his sacred Person, and it selfe, against any forraigne or domesticke surprise or invasion.

It is a true Rule, that Interest Reipublicæ, ne suare, quis malè utabur, a man (contrary to the opinion of the vulgar) may not doe with his propertie as he pleaseth; for that the Common-wealth hath an interest peramount the propertie of any private man, and there is no Subject, but that, either more or lesse, according to his Talent, or place, that God hath put him in, either in Church, or State, is intrusted with the common good: and therefore if he doth contrary to his trust, use his Talent or place, against that end for which it was given unto him, he is punishable by the Law for it.

And therefore if a man will destroy his woods, cast his money into the Sea, burne his Corn upon the Land, or in his Barnes, or the like, cleerely by the Law he is punishable for it: and agreeing with this Trin.Jac. many were indicted of a Riot in the Starre-chamber, for putting in of their Beasts into Corne, claiming their Common there, and in this case, the Lord Chancellor said, that though they had good title to the Common, yet that they should be here punished, for that they had destroyed the Corne, which is against the weale publique.

And without question, the rigour of all Lawes, ought to receive such qualification, and equitable construction, that the Common-wealth doe not suffer or be indamaged. The Law was made to support the common good, and therefore that Law is against Law, that is against the common good. Nemo sibi nascitur, no man was borne for himselfe; all men both Rulers and people, were borne to this end, to contribute, and conferre some good to the Republique: and therefore Qui sibi solum vivit, he that lives to himselfe onely, doth not live to that end, for which he was created, much lesse he, which makes construction of the Law against that end, for that were to destroy both Law, and government, which every man was borne to defend.

It is a Rule in the Law, that Judges ought alwayes to make such construction of the Deeds of men, and of their Grants, Ut res magis valeat, quàm pereat, that is, that they should rather take effect, then perish: so I say, it may well be taken for a Rule, that the Judges should not so construe the Law, that the Law should destroy it selfe, which will necessarily follow in the destruction of the Common-wealth; but that they should so interpret it, Ve respublica magis valeat & floreat, quàm preat & destruatur, that the Common-wealth should rather flourish, then perish, and be destroyed.

I agree, that in the case in question, by the strict Rule and Law of Prerogative, the governing and disposing of the Militia of the Kingdome is onely in the King, and that he onely may proclaime warre, and he alone establish peace amongst his people: yet we ought not so to construe this Law, that it is so in the King, that it cannot be severed from him, and that no other can intermeddle with it, without the consent of the King though that it be for the Weale publique, and for the securing of the Kingdome, being in imminent danger, the King refusing to settle it, as in right he ought, upon the prayer of his people, represented in the desires of the Parliament. For to make such a construction were utterly to confound, and destroy, both Law, & Common wealth, as I have said before, and therefore ought not to be admitted.

The King hath this Prerogative allowed him by the Law, that he shall not be bound by any Statute, except that he be expressely named in the Statute,&illegible; Rep. fo. 14. b. yet it is resolved in the 5. Rep. that all Statutes, which are made to suppresse wrong, to take away fraud, or to prevent the decay of Religion, shall binde the King, though he be not named in them; for, saith the Booke, Religion, Justice, and Truth, are the sure Supporters of the Crownes and Diadems of Kings. So I say in this case, the King by his Prerogative (as I have said before) ought to have the sole disposing of the Militia: But if in imminent danger, he refuse to settle this for the safetie of himselfe, and his Kingdome, according to the trust reposed in him, his Prerogative ought then to give way for the securing of his Crowne, that those who are intrusted with the Weale publique, as the Parliament is, may settle this for the defence of the King, and Kingdome, according, as in truth, they are bound, as I shall afterwards shew.

It is a Rule in our Law, That the King can doe no wrong; and with this accords Bracton,Bracton fo. 107. Nihil aliud potest Rex in terris, cum sit Dei minister & vicarius, nisi id solum quod de jure potest, nec quod principi placet, legis habet vigorem, the King can doe nothing upon earth, seeing that he is Gods minister and Vicar, but that onely which of right he ought to doe, neither ought the Kings will, to have the force and vigour of a Law. Here note, that the will of the King, ought to subscribe to the Law; and not the Law to the will of the King.

&illegible; Com. fo. 246.And in Pl. Com. 1. Rep. & 5. Rep. it is said, That the King cannot doe a wrong, neither will his Prerogative be any Warrant to him to doe injurie to another: and if the King cannot injure one single person, without question, he cannot injure all the Common-wealth,&illegible; Rep. fo. 44. b. which he should doe in this case, if both the Houses of Parliament, in this time of imminent danger, the King refusing to joyn with them, should not have this power of setling the Militia, in defence of the Kingdome, without his consent.Rep. fo. 55. b.

I agree with Bracton, that the King, Parem non habet in regno, nec superiorem, He hath no equall, nor superiour in his Kingdome; but that is to be understood, that there is no man above or equall with his Majestie; for he saith afterwards; Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo, & sub lege,Bracton fo. &illegible; that the King ought not to be under man, but under God, and under the Law: and after fo. 34. a, he saith, Rex habet superiorem, Deum, scilicet, item legem, per quam factus est Rex, item &illegible; suam, viz. Comites Barones, &c.Bracton fo. &illegible; the King hath a superiour, to wit, God, in like manner, the Law, which made him King, and also his Court, to wit, the Earles, Barons, &c. which cannot be understood of any other, then the high Court of Parliament. And in the places before cited, he saith, Quod non est Rex, ubi dominatur voluntas, non Lex, He is not King, when his will rules, not the Law. Then if it be thus, as Bracton saith, that the Law, and the two Houses of Parliament, are above the King: and that the King is as no King, when he doth not submit to the Law, (which will of necessitie follow, for that the same Law, which made him King, injoynes and obliges him also to defend his people committed to his charge; and without doubt, the one as just as the other, and if he refuse to protect his people, which is a dispising, and a depressing of that Law which gave him this Soveraigntie: certainly, the Law will not defend him in this his tyranny) I conceive, that in this case, the Law will in its own defence, and in default of the King, who ought to have maintained the Law, inable the two Houses of Parliament, to put the Kingdome into a posture of warre, in defence of the King, his Lawes and Subjects.

But now the great Question is, What, and where is the ground of our feares, and jealousies, and where is the imminent danger; for, many say, that they cannot see it, and then it not being visible, and obvious to every eye: a Question as great in shew as the former, arises upon this, Who is, or may be the proper Judge of this imminent danger. To the first, I answer, that our feare, and the imminent danger pretended, is no Phantasme or Chimerâ, as some would have it, but it is a reall and visible cause of feare,Instit. fo. 253. Et talis metus qui cadere potest in virum constantem, such a feare, as may befall a constant man, as my Lord Cooke describeth a feare, that may possesse a generous and settled spirit. And that it is thus, I appeale to the conscience of any wise & indifferent man, whether that the Commune incendium, the common sice, or calamitie in our neighbour Nation of Ireland, clothed with these three circumstances, as I shall set it forth, will not cause, and justly too, a wise man to feare, and doubt, what the event will be.

As first, that they are our Neighbours, and when my Neighbours house is on fire: will any man adjudge this to be a phantasme or an esseminate feare in me, to provide for the securing of my person and estate, from perishing in the common ruine?

Secondly, It is Religion, that these cruell, barbarous, and unheard of Tyrants, make for a ground of their horrid Rebellion: and what stronger ingagement can there be, then this, for to incourage and spurre men forward, in any desperate designe? Especially, those of the Popish faction, who may have a pardon before-hand, for the act they shall commit, be it never so desperate: And doe we not thinke, that this will be a strong incitement to men, who conceive themselves tyed in conscience to undertake that which they doe, to wade through any misery, for the accomplishment of their desired end, knowing before hand, that they have a pardon for the most horrid act or attempt that they can doe, conducing to the perfecting of the same? And then as this obligeth all Nations besides, of the Popish partie, ought not we to thinke, and beleeve, that such an opportunitie, must of necessitie, stimulate them forward, to be ayding and assisting to such a designe, which will infallibly at the last, merit either Heaven or Hell? I am confident (and it stands with all reason that it should be so, for that they have not for a long time, praysed be God, had the like opportunitie) that the Pope, with all his adherents, are now plotting, and contriving, with their holy Father the Devill, to operate the ruine of the Protestant Religion: and shall this ingage them to fight against God, under a pretence of being on his side? And shall it not invite us, who fight for God, and his truth, which we have so long time, happily & peaceably through Gods goodnesse enjoyed, to prepare our selves, and all that we have, for the defence of the same? To conclude this, we who have the greatest part of the world our enemies, may justly feare, that they are now plotting and contriving that for England, that is already acted in Ireland. And let us not say, that they are at enmitie one with another, and therefore, are not at leisure, to harme us: for we may be sure, that they will shake hands, to doe us a mischiefe:Duke 23. 12. according to that in holy Writ, of Pilate and Herod, who though they were utter enemies one to another, yet they were made friends, to combine against Christ.

Thirdly, and lastly, who is able to say, that either he, or his children, shall live to see an end of that bloudy persecution and rebellion, and what the successe of it will be? True it is, that God hath hitherto gone forth with our Armies, and hath in an exceeding measure, and above all expectation, blessed their endeavours, and crowned their actions with a happie successe, God be praised for it, but yet who knoweth, whether they shall ever be able to root out this rebellious Tribe? I speak not this out of any diffidence of Gods continued favour and goodnesse towards us, or to make others mistrust; but onely to demonstrate, that there is a just cause of feare; for who can divine what the event of warre will be: Exitus belli incertus, that is, the issue of warre is uncertain. Besides (and which brings me to my second ground of our just and dreadfull feares) if the distractions of this Kingdome continue, which God defend, what ayde can they expect from us, who are like to be surrounded with the like misery: so that their necessitie, may cutt them short of their hopes, and by this much adde to our feares.

Secondly, having shewed our just cause of fear, which riseth ab extra, from our deplorable brethren, and neighbours; now I shall shew, our cause of fear, that ariseth ab intra: from the unhappy distractions, which are risen amongst our selves. Who is it, that doth not see, the sad divisions and generall sidings throughout the Realm? which hath grown upon this unhappy division of the King and Parliament; which when it will be reconciled, God knoweth. And if this (which adds much to our miserie) had not happened, we could not before have been secure, without a just cause of fear: for what divellish plots, and fearfull designes, have been discovered through Gods mercy, and the vigilant eye of the Parliament; tending to the destruction of our best birth-right and inheritance, the priviledges and freedome of Parliaments? Without the continuance of which, that which is nearest and dearest unto thee, whether it be thy Religion, life, or liberty: what ever it be, that thou most blessest thy self withall, will then depend upon the Arbitrary will of thy Soveraign; so that thou mayest not then, stile ought that God hath given thee, thy own: which heavy judgement I beseech God to divert from this sinfull Land and Nation; for we may truly acknowledge, that it were just upon us, that we who have so much abused Gods blessings, should now be deprived of them: and that we, who have so much abused the freedome of conscience, of our laws, lives, liberties, and estates, should now be subjected to a perpetuall slavery. Now to conclude this likewise, divide the Kingdom into foure parts, and I am confident, that the Papist. Newter, and Cavalier (I might adde likewise the domineering proud Clergy, who would fain reduce all things to their late condition) who lie perdue, and wait for an opportunitie, for to bring a speedie destruction upon this Common-wealth, will make two parts, I think I might, without any imputation, or prejudice to judgement, say three &illegible; of the foure, and now put all these things together, and I beleeve, that no indifferent understanding man, but will be forced to confesse, that there was, and still is, a just cause of fear, and of putting of the Kingdom, into a posture of warre. And then the imminent danger being pregnant, and demonstrable to all the world: the last question is taken away.

But admitting that it were not prospicuous, and visible to all, then the question is, who is the proper Judge of this imminent danger, and I conceive plainly, under favour, that the Parliament ought to be,&illegible; Rep. 106. b. &illegible; 2. and no other: and my first reason is grounded upon the rule of Law, viz. that the Parliament can do no wrong, which is warranted by the 9. Rep. the 6. Rep. and many other books. And in Pl. Com. it is said, that the Parliament is a Court of thrice great honour and justice, of which none ought to imagine a dishonourable thing.&illegible; Rep. 27. b. &illegible; 2. And this I conceive to be grounded upon the Writ of Summons to Parliament, which wils, that the elections should be De gravioribus & discretioribus viris, &c. of the most grave and discreet men. And Fortescue speaking of the Parliament, saith, We ought necessarily to think, that the Statutes of this Realm are made with great wisdom and prudence,Pl. Com. fo. 398 &illegible; ca. 18. Dum non unins aut centum solum consultorum virorum, sed plus quam trecentorum electorum hominum, quali numero olim Senatus Romanorum regebatur, ipsa sunt edita. For that they are not made by one, or an hundred onely of sage judicious men, but by more then three hundred of chosen men: by such a number, as in times past, the Senate of Rome was used to be ruled.

Object.But here it will be objected, that this Ordinance is not setled by Parliament, for that the King and many of his Nobles, were not there, nor never consented to it; and therefore that we ought not to estreme, or account, some few Scismaticall and factious persons (who seek their own ends, and not the common good) to be the Parliament: and therefore you mistake in giving of them the Style of the Parliament.

Answ,A strange, unheard of, and illegall objection, a pretty trick and wilde to mask illegall slanders, under illegall objections. It is a wonder to hear such strange, and as unparalelld, as unwarrantable, invectives, against the Parliament, which are published in the Kings name, and under his protection, and patronage: while in the mean time, the King (whose distance of place, or affection, cannot divide from his Parliament, as I shall afterwards shew) suffers in those very obloquies, and dishonourable detractions, which are coyned for his honorable Assembly of Parliament.

For, as all our books agree, the Parliament is as one body: and the chief or head of this body, is the King: and with this agreeth, Dyer, fo. 60. 2. who saith,Dyer, fo. 60. 2. that the Estate of Parliament consists of three parts: viz. of the King, as the chief Head; and of the Lords, the chief and principall Members of the Body; and of the Commons, Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, the inferiour Members: and these make the body of the Parliament. Now if it be thus, that the King, Lords and Commons make but one body, and that the King is the Head of this body, as in truth the Law is: then it will thus in reason follow, that no more then you can divide the head from the naturall body, and yet preserve the body alive, can you divide the King from the Parliament, and yet have the Parliament continue, as in truth it doth: and I hope that there is none so void of reason, as to think, that the Kings dividing of himself from his Parliament, (for the case is utterly mistaken, to say that the Parliament, severs the King from them) shall destroy his Parliament, though I suppose, that many, who dare not bring their actions to the teste, would have it so.

Now if it be so, that, notwithstanding this unhappy division, the Parliament doth vertually, and actually continue, (which, God defend it should be otherwise, for then Parliament, and no Parliament would be all one) then, of necessity, it must follow, that the King, who is the head of this great body, is not divided in Law, though he be in distance, for if so it must needs be, that the body would be destroyed, for that a Body (as I have said before) cannot subsist without a Head. And it must likewise follow, that they usurp no honour or power to themselves, more then by the Law is due, to stile themselves the Parliament. And therefore whatsoever imputations, or dishonourable invectives (things too common in the mouthes of many, who have not common reason, much lesse Law, to discover a truth) are imposed and cast upon the two Houses of Parliament, reflect upon the honour of the King, and are a great stain and blemish to it.

Then if it be thus, that the Parliament, in judgement of Law, can do no wrong, and that no dishonorable thing ought to be imagined of them; certainly, they are the most proper Judges of this imminent danger. But to this it will be objected that the King likewise, in judgement of Law, can do no wrong, and therefore he notwithstanding this reason, may be as proper a Judge of the imminent danger, as any one, and upon this ground his judgement ought rather to be received then the judgement of any, yea of the Parliament it self; & he tels us, that there is no imminent danger, what then meanes this great contention about the Militia? To this I answer, that it is true, the rule of Law likewise is, That the King can doe no wrong; but the reason of this is, for that it is presumed, that what the King doth, he doth upon the advice, & reducement of evill Counsellors, who with a spetious shew, pretend nothing more then the good of the Common-wealth; whereas in truth, they intend nothing lesse. And hath it not been frequent, for Kings, seduced by wicked and malignant Counsellors, to do those things which have been a dishonour to themselves, and a great gravamen and prejudice to the publique: and if so, my conclusion is, that I would as willing a man should doe me injury, upon his owne principles, as by the advice of others; for though happily the wrong may not be so great, as to himselfe, yet the damage is all one to me. But now on the other side, who can tell, or what Story is able to relate, that ever a Parliament did doe that thing, that was prejudiciall to the Common-wealth? Why then if this position hold true, That Kings seduced, may injure the Common-wealth, but that Parliaments cannot: I conclude, notwithstanding this objection, that the Parliament, for this reason, are the most proper Judges of this imminent danger.

Againe, they are the most proper Judges of an imminent danger, who in probabilitie may have the best cognisance, and information of it: but the Parliament (which is the representative body of the whole Realme, and the eyes of all the Kingdome) must of necessitie have the best cognisance and information of any imminent and approaching danger: Ergo, they are the best and most competent Judges of it.

Last of all, the Parliament are the most proper Judges of an imminent danger; for that they are those, whom the Common-wealth hath intrusted with its future happinesse, they are our Judges, those whose judgement we have bound our selves by our owne free Election, to stand to, and therefore we cannot now recede from it, or see with other eyes then they see; if they say, that they see an imminent and approaching danger, we ought not to say, that there is no such matter; and if they say, that the Militia is well and legally settled, we cannot, nor ought not to say, that it is against the Law; for that our judgement is bound up in, and superseded by theirs. But to this it will be said, that this were a kinde of implicite faith, or if I may so speake, a kinde of Heresie in Law; for a man to be tide to subscribe to other mens judgements, and to beleeve that whatsoever they doe, is lawfull: To this I answer shortly, that there is a great difference, between a subscription of compulsion, and a subscription of consent; for volenti non fit injuria, that is, he that cõsents to the doing of a thing, is not injured by the thing done. Againe, the Parliament would not have us to pinne our faith upon their judgements, to beleeve without reason; for, as it is well knowne, they have published the justice and integritie of their cause, to the whole world, and have left their proceedings to the judgement and determination of every private conscience; so that cleerely this objection holds not.

Then if the judgement of Parliament, be our judgement; what else doe they then oppose their own judgement, who dare oppose the judgement of Parliament, which is folly? and what else doe they but preferre their proper and private judgement, before the judgement of the whole Parliament? which is an extreame insolency; for that they represent the whole Kingdome: and are the most worthy part of it, and for that, we have, as I have said before, bound our selves by our owne consent and election, to stand to their judgement and determination. Wherefore, for all these preceding reasons, I conclude this point, that admitting the imminent danger were not perspicuous and manifest to every eye, that the Parliament as they are the most proper Judges, so they ought to be the onely Judges of it, and no other person whatsoever.

Now for the Objection, that many of the Lords and Commons, did never consent to the Ordinance of Parliament, for that they were with his Majestie, and that therefore this should make their determination invalid, and ineffectuall: This is a more strange objection then the other, for that it is against the rule of Law, that any man should take advantage of his owne wrong; and it is cleare, that after the Parliament is once begunne, their personall attendance is so necessary, and of such importance to the Parliament, that they ought not by the Law, for any businesse whatsoever, to be absent, and so is Dyer.Dyer. fo. &illegible; 6. H. 8. ca. &illegible; 3. E. 2. &illegible; Corone 61 &illegible; Crompt. &illegible; Courts. fo. &illegible; And by the Stat. of 6. H. 8. it is enacted, that no Knight, Citizen, or Burges, absent himselfe, without licence of the Speakes and Commons, under the paine of the losse of their wages. And in 3. E. 2. Fitz: Corone 61. cited in Crompton Jur. the Bishop of Winton was arraigned in the Kings Bench, for that he came to the Parliament, and departed without licence. Why then is it so, that their withdrawing of themselves, is a crime in them? Shall they then take advantage of this offence and neglect of theirs, of the Weale publique; for the good of which, they were called and assembled together, to avise? certainly not. Besides, if this objection might hold, who is it that doth not see, what the inconvenience might be, Et argumentum ab inconvenienti est bonum in lege, an argument drawne from inconvenience, is good in Law. For by this invention, the conclusions and determinations of those who are present, intending the Weale publique, (as in dutie they are bound) should be all frustrated, and annihilated, by the absence of those, who voluntarily and against Law, withdraw themselves; which would be destructive to all Parliaments.

For posito that all the Lords or all the Commons, should voluntarily and out of an indisposednesse to the common good, withdraw themselves, and utterly refuse to performe that trust, which is reposed in them, of counselling and consenting to such Lawes, which might establish peace, and a settled condition in Church and State: will any man thinke, that if in this time of dissertion of the Lords or Commons, there be an apparent & imminent danger, threatning ruine to the Common-wealth, if it be not in an opportune and seasonable time prevented, that in this case, it lies not in the power of the King and Lords, or of the King & Commons onely, as the case is, by way of Ordinance, to settle the Kingdom in such a state and temper, as may prevent any approaching misery? Without question it doth, or otherwise this conclusion (as I have said before) would be destructive to all Parliaments.

I agree, that an Act of Parliament cannot be made, by which a new Law should be enacted,H. 7. 18. that should be obligatory to the Subject for ever, (I meane untill it were repealed by another Act) but by the consent of the King, Lords, and Commons; and with this accords the Books, 4. H. 7 there an Act was made by the King and Lords, but nothing was spoken of the Commons; and by all the Judges, this is no act of Parliament.H. 7. 14. 7 H. 7. No Statute except that the Lords and Commons assent to it. And 18. H. 7. it is no act of Parliament, except it be made by the King Lords, and Commons. By this it is manifest, that all the three Estates ought to joyne in the making of an act of Parliament: and this is so cleare, that I need not cite any other authoritie in proofe of it, for our Books are plentifull in this point.H. 7. 27. Onely I shall remember one remarkable case, which I finde in our Law, to prove that the Books which say, That an Act of Parliament cannot be made, without the consent of the Lords, that this ought to be intended of the Lords Temporall onely, and not of the Lords Spirituall: and therefore it is resolved by the Judges in 7. H. 8. Keilway.H. 8. Keilway. fo. 184. b. that the King may well hold his Parliament, by him, his Temporall Lords & Commons, without the Spirituall Lords: so that by this it was manifest, that they were not essentially necessary to a Parliament; for that the King might have holden a Parliament without them: and therefore it is not now so much to be wondred at, that they are totally excluded by Act of Parliament.

But now on the other side, I conceive as clearely, under favour, that if the King do utterly forsake them, and decline their advice and counsell, to which he ought to adhere during Parliament, that in such case they may (as I have said before) make such Ordinances, without him, for the securing of the Kingdome, in case of exigency and extremitie, as shall be obligatory to all the Realme, pending Parliament: for otherwise, they should have the name of a Parliament onely, & not the power and vertue of it.

But now it may be objected, that the King by his Prerogative, may call a Parliament when he pleaseth, and also adjourne and dissolve it when he pleaseth: and that the power given by the Writ of Summons, of the Lords to Parliament, is onely ad tractandum & consulendum, &c. and therefore it will be concluded, that by the same power the King may command his Counsellors whither he pleaseth. To this I answer, and agree, that the King may call or dissolve a Parliament when he pleaseth, and so totally toll their power; but yet under favour, pending Parliament, unadjourned, the King can neither retarde their proceedings, nor take away their persons: and that I shall prove thus: the King, as sons Justitiæ, the fountaine of Justice, from whom all Judiciary power is derived, may likewise make, whom he pleaseth, to be a Judge, to dispence the Lawes in justice and equitie unto his people; but will it therefore follow, that when he hath made such and such to be his Judges, that he may either retarde their proceedings, or countermand their judgements, under favour, nothing lesse. Againe, as I have shewed before, they are punishable by the Law, for withdrawing of themselves: and it were hard, that the King should have power to command me that act, which being done, subjects me to a severe punishment. Now for that part of the objection, that they are but his Counsellors, and not his Judges: to that I shall give, as I hope, a full and satisfactory answer afterwards.

And now I shall conclude this first ground or reason, with another answer to the objection, against the imminent danger, and this I ground upon the words in the Kings Writ, by which he summons the Lords to Parliament; in the body of which Writ he saith, Mandamus quod consideratis dictorum negotiorum ardultate & periculis imminentibus, cessante excusatione quacunque, dictis die & loco personalitèr intersitis nobiscum, &c. that is, we command you, that considering the greatnesse of the businesse, and the imminent dangers, laying aside all excuse, you be personally with us, the said day and place, &c. Here the King by his Writ saith expressely, that at the time of the calling of this Parliament, there was an imminent danger; and as now it should be dishonourable for the King to contradict himselfe, so I doe not conceive, that he shall be received to deny that extrajudicially, which he hath confessed by his Writ judicially.

But to this it will be said, that the Writ, Est breve formatum, that is, it is a formed Writ, or a Writ of course, and that there is no other, and that from this there is no varying; so that be the occasion of calling of the Parliament, what it will, the same form ought to be pursued, and no other; and therefore it is no concluding reason, that there is an imminent danger, because the Writ saith so. To this I answer, that we ought not to presume, that the King will speak any thing in a judiciall way, as here he doth, which should be vain and superfluous; besides, if you consider the time in which this Parliament was called, when that the Scottish Army was in England, and at which time such distractions, and rumours of warres, did I say rumours of warres? I might have said Warre it self; was amongst us: when that the extreme insolencie and pride of the Clergie; together with the darknesse of superstition and Popery, had almost overwhelmed this Nation with imminent destruction and misery: the fear of which doth yet cloud the face of the poore Commonalty, I say, these things considered, we may justly conclude, that the King, at that time, spake as he intended, and therefore certainly now, he shall not be received to contradict it. Wherefore I conclude this first reason, that by reason of the imminent danger which threatens the Common-wealth, the King refusing to settle the Militia, the Parliament may well do it.

2.Secondly, I hold that the Parliament may do it; for that the King by his refusall hath made a breach of that trust that is committed to him, by God, and his people, that there is a trust committed to him, and that the greatest also, that any one under God can have. I have in part demonstrated it before; for I have shewn how that he is bound by the Law to defend and protect his people, their lives, liberties, and estates, from any forrein or domestick danger; and saith Fortescue, ca. 13. cited before,&illegible; ca. 13. Rex ad tutelem legis, corporum, & honorum, erectus est: he is erected King, for this purpose, and intent, to defend the Law, the bodies and goods of his Subjects. And he saith himself (as I have likewise shewed before) in the Commission directed to Commissioners of Sewers, that by reason of his royall dignity, Astrictus est ad providendum salvationi regni sui; He is bound to secure his kingdom. And this he is bound to do by the Law, and Justice: for he ought to rule according to Law, and for this purpose he is intrusted with the Law also: and therefore in 8. H. 7. it is said,&illegible; 7. fo. 1. a. that the King is conservator of the Law, the which is the Common-weal. As if it had been said, the Common-weal, depends upon the Kings well keeping, and observing, of the Law. And in many places of Bracton, amongst which, this is one: fo. 55. b. he saith, Sciendum quod ipse Dominus Rex, ordinariam habet jurisdictionem, & dignitatem, & potestatem, super omnes, qui in regno suo sunt, habet enim omnia jura in manu sua quæ ad Coronam, & laicam pertinent potestatem, & materialem gladium, qui pertinet ad regni gubernaculum, habet etiam iustitiam & iudicium, quæ sunt iurisdictiones, us ex iurisdictione sua, sicut Dei Minister, tribuat unicuique quod suum fuerit: that is,&illegible; fo. 55. b. we must know, that the King hath ordinary jurisdiction, and dignitie, and power, above all which are in his kingdom; for he hath all the Laws in his hand, which do pertain to the Crown, and lay power; and the materiall sword, which belongeth to the government of his kingdom; he hath also justice, and judgement, which are jurisdictions, that by his jurisdiction, as Gods Minister, he may give to every one, that which is his own. Here you may see, that the King is intrusted, with the Laws, and Justice, as also with the materiall Sword, to this end, that he may defend his people committed to his charge, as well by force, if occasion be, as by righteous judgement. And to this also he is bound by his Oath, as I have said before, which I find in Bracton,Bract. fo. 107. a. ca. 9. fo. 107. by which he sweareth that In omnibus iudiciis aquitatem præcipiet, &c. ut per justitiam suam firma gaudent pace universi: that is, that he will use equitie in all his judgements, that all men may injoy a firm peace, by his justice. And there he further saith, that ad hoc creatus est & electus, ut iustitiam faciat universis, &c. & quod iustè iudicaverit, sustineat, & defendet, &c. He is created, and elected King, for this purpose, and intent, to do justice to all men, and that he should judge justly, sustain and defend them. And with this accords 6. H. 7. where it is said,6. H. 7. 16. that the King is bound for to do right to parties. And as he ought to rule according to Law, so he himself, ought to be governed by the Law, as I have shewed before.Bract. fo. 5. b. And as Bracton saith, fol. 5. b. Ipse autem Rex, non debet esse sub homine, sed sub Deo, & sub Lege, quia Lexfacit Legem: The King ought not to be under man, but under God, and the Law. Now I conceive that it is manifest, that the King is intrusted with the Laws, lives, liberties, and estates of his Subjects, all which he of right ought to defend in peace and tranquillity, as he also by his Oath is bound; and therefore Bracton saith, Est Corona Regis facere iustitiam, & iudicium, & tenere pacem,Bract. fo. 55. &illegible; sine quibus corona consistere non potest nec tenere: It is the Crown of the King to do justice, and judgement, and to maintain peace; without which, his Crown cannot stand and continue: as if he had said, it is so essentiall to the King to do justice and judgement; and to maintain peace, that you destroy the Crown, if you take away these.

Now I shall prove, that the King hath made a breach of this great trust committed to him, foure wayes. First, by denying of his Protection to his people. Secondly, by not supporting of the Laws, and the Priviledges of Parliament. Thirdly, by not endeavouring to maintain peace amongst his people. And fourthly and lastly, by denying of Justice; and in all these particulars I shall prove, that the King hath broken the trust committed to him.

And first, he hath broken the trust committed to him by denying of his protection, and this he hath done three wayes.The following marginalia text is unreadable and Liberty Fund has made no effort to partially transcribe it. 1. By denying of his legall protection, that is, in not protecting of his people according to Law: and this he hath done, by denying to settle the Militia, by the advise of his great Counsell, according to Law: by whom onely, during Parliament, he ought to be advised, for during the continuance of this great Counsell, all inferiour Counsels ought to cease: and therfore the Counsell of others neither can, nor ought to countermand theirs: but of this I shall speak more fully afterwards. 2. The King hath denied his Royall protection to his people, in taking up of Arms against his Parliament, who is the representative Body of the whole Kingdom: and this is the most strong refusall of his protection, of all others, for by this he doth not refuse onely to protect them, but he goes about to destroy them, whom, by the Law, and his Oath, he is bound to preserve and defend. And thirdly and lastly, he hath denied his royall protection to his people in this, that in time of imminent danger to the Kingdom, he hath denied to settle the Militia; and he that denies the means, denies the end. For it is a rule with us in our Law, that Qui tollit medium, tollit quoque finem: He that takes away the means, takes away the end. And it is all one in effect, to deny a thing, as to deny the means per quod pervenitur ad illud: by which you may come to the thing. Now it is clear, that the sole means, under God, to defend this kingdom, in time of imminent danger, from its enemies, either forrain or domestick, is, by settling of the Militia, and by putting of the Forts, and Magazine of the kingdom, into faithfull and true hands, such as may be confided in, being a matter of so great consequence, and of so high importance to the whole Common-weal. Now the King refusing to do this, doth he not in effect, deny his protection to his people? for denying of the means, it is all one as if he had denied the end: so that I conceive, for these reasons, the King hath denied to protect his people, as by the Law he is bound, and therefore hath made a breach of the trust that is reposed in him.

2.Secondly, I conceive, that the King hath broken this great trust, in not supporting of the Laws, and the priviledges of Parliament; that he hath not maintained the Law appeareth plainly, by that, that I have said before, for that he hath refused to be ruled by it, as he ought: for though that he is not sub homine, under man; yet he is sub Lege, under the Law, as I have shewed before, and therefore ought to be governed by it. And what is this but a refusing to be ruled by Law, when he refuseth upon the prayer of his Parliament to settle the Militia for the defence of his Kingdom, and people, according to Law? And that the King hath broken the Priviledges of Parliament, what more plain? I might instance in many things, but I shall instance in onely one or two: And here I appeal to all the world, whether his withdrawing of himself from his Parliament; and not onely so, but his endeavouring, by his many detractions and imputations laid upon his Parliament, to withdraw all the hearts of his people from them likewise: and, which is yet worse, his supporting and maintaining of such men, and keeping of them from justice and their condigne punishment, who are Delinquents in a high nature, against his Parliament: I say, that I appeal to all the world, whether these be not great breaches of the Priviledges of Parliament? and what greater breach of the priviledges of Parliament can there be? then to protect and defend them, without any colour of Law, or justice, who indeavour nothing, but the ruine of Parliament, and in this, of our Laws, lives, and liberties: so I conceive, that this also is a breach of that great trust which is reposed in his Majestie, by God, his people, and the Laws of the Land.

Thirdly, I conceive that the King hath infringed this great trust,3. by not indeavouring to maintaine peace: and this two wayes, by his commission, and omission; by his commission, in taking up of Armes against his people, as I have said before, and then by his omission, and not onely so, but by an absolute refusall, in this time of imminent danger, to settle the Kingdome in a posture of defence, the sole meanes, under God, as I have said, to maintaine peace and tranquillitie amongst us: and this is against his Oath also, which the King himselfe was pleased of late to publish to his people: which I finde likewise expressely in Bracton,Bract. fo. 107. &illegible; that the King first sweareth, Se esse pracepturum, & pro viribus opem impensurum ut Ecelesiæ Dei & omni populo Christiano, vera pax, omni suo tempore, observetur, that is, that he will indeavour to the utmost of his power, that true peace may be kept & observed, to the Church of God, and to all Christian people, all his dayes.

Fourthly, and lastly, I conceive that the King hath broken his trust,4. by denying of justice: and this he hath done two wayes; first, by denying to surrender up Delinquents to the Justice of the Law: and secondly, by denying to settle the Militia, by and according to the advise of his great Counsell the Parliament. Now that the King is obliged to doe Justice, it is without question, for his very Oath (as I have shewed before) ties him expressely to it, and so is 6. H. 7. cited before,Bracton fo. &illegible; and Bracton, fo. 107. a. where he saith, that Ad hoe creatus est & electus ut justicians faciat universis, &c. He is created and elected King, for this purpose and intent, that he may doe justice to all men. And what greater act of Justice can there be, then for the King to defend his people in peace? or what greater act of Justice can there be, then for the King, at the request of his people, represented by the body of Parliament, to enact such Lawes, which conduce to the maintaining of peace? Certainly none. And this Bracton seemeth to intimate,Bracton. fo. &illegible; Sinon esset qui justitiam faceret, pax de facili potest exterminari, &c. If there were not one who would doe Justice, peace might easily be extirminated. Here note, that he doth not say, that our lives, Lawes, Liberties, or Estates, for want of Justice might easily be extirminated; but our peace, by this, as it were, concentering all Justice in this act of maintaining peace: and without question, all our happinesse, under God, consists in the supporting and maintaining of peace: for, take that away, and all things fall to utter ruine and destruction. And certainly, if it be thus, that the greatest act of Justice in the King that can be, consists in maintaining of peace, and in granting of such Lawes, which conduce unto this end, without question the denying of this by the King, must needs be the greatest act of injustice in the King that can be, and by consequence, a breach of that trust, that is reposed in his Majestie. And therefore I doe conceive, that at the least in this, the King can have no negative voyce: and I doe not conceive, that the King can have any negative voyce in Parliament, in other things; for if the King, by his Oath, and the Law of the Land, be obliged to doe Justice, (as in truth he is) and if it be as great an act of Justice in the King, as can be, not onely justly to dispence the Lawes in esse, in being, to his people; but also to grant such new Lawes unto them as conduce to the well governing of them, in peace and happinesse. Why then certainly it must of necessitie follow, that the King can have no negative voyce; but is bound under this heavie sinne, of the breach of his Oath, and the Lawes of the Land, to grant such Lawes as are requested of him by his people.

But here it may be objected, that the King had this Prerogative by the Law, that he might have called a Parliament when he pleased, and there was no positive Law to the contrary, before this Parliament, in which the King hath devested himselfe of this power; and if before at the request of his people, he had not been pleased to grant them a Parliament, why, this in effect, was a denier of Justice, for that the King denied the meanes by which it might be obtained, and yet this was lawfull for him to doe; therefore it will be concluded, that by the same reason he may have a negative voyce in Parliament.Cro. Iur. fo. 7. b. And Cromp. Jur. of Courts saith expressely, that when the King doth assent to a Bill, then he writes upon the Bill, L’Roy veult, that is, the King will have it so; and if he doth not assent, then it is indorsed L’Roy advisera, that the King will advise; here it doth appeare how the King hath a negative voyce allowed him by the Law. To this I answer, and agree, these Prerogatives de facto to be in the King, but whether in truth, they be such as are compatible, and may stand with the Oath and Justice of the King: this may be questionable, and under favour, I conceive that they cannot; for that, as I have shewed, his Oath and the Lawes of the Land, ties his Majestie to doe Justice to his people, and the granting of new Laws unto them, upon their request, is an Act of Justice, and therefore he cannot denie them without breach of his Oath, and the Lawes of the Land; and by consequence, these prerogatives are not compatible, with the Oath and Justice of the King; and though peradventure the Law may dispence with it selfe, yet it cannot with the Oath of the King. Wherefore I conceive, notwithstanding this objection, that the King can have no negative voyce: but of this onely by the way.

And is it thus, that the King hath made a breach of that trust reposed in him, by God and his people? as in truth, I have cleered it unto you: then none so proper to supply this defect, in his Majestie, by the disposing of the Militia, for the defence and protection of the King & Kingdome, as the Parliament, who are at this time entrusted, under God, not onely with our esse, with our being, but with our bene esse, with our well-being also.

But here it may be objected, that the King derives his Crowne and regall power from God, and that therefore he is responsible to God alone for his actions, and not to man: To this I answer, that it is a most strange Episcopall and illegall objection; for what is this but the attributing of a power to the King above Law? and the giving of him such a prerogative that should not be subject to those Constitutions, which his predecessors before him had been, and though it should be admitted, that as all power is derived originally from God, so especially this; yet it doth not follow, that it was therefore conferred by an extraordinary and immediate hand of God, as it was upon Saul and David,1 Sam. 9. & 14. yet they likewise were confirmed and approved by the people, as you may reade in holy Writ. Besides, Saul and David, lived not under any Municipall or positive Constitutions of men, which they were bound to maintaine and observe, as the King of England doth, and therefore it must needs be, that their power must be more absolute, which was not circumscribed within the bounds and limits of any humane Lawes. But now the Kings of England having subjected themselves to the Law of the Land, and received their Crownes with that trust and tacite condition, of defending of the Lawes, lives, and liberties of their Subjects: the Law were idle and vaine, if there should be none that should have this power, for the breach of this trust by his Majestie, to interpose for the securing of him, his Lawes, and people. And if this divine prerogative, which the Bishops doe so buzze into the Kings eares, should be admitted, I would faine know what difference would be made, betwixt an absolute Monarke, and the King of England: and cleerely this was never reputed for other, nor can be (the Crowne being subject to the Law as well as the people) then a mixt Monarchy: but I shall conclude this, that they who so much defend and exalt this divine prerogative, would in the conclusion (if they might have their way) upon the same ground, advance the Miter above the Crowns. God open the Kings eyes, that he may see and acknowledge himselfe subject to the Lawes, and may rule his people accordingly: and grant that he may detest such advice, as dangerous to the State, and the suggesters of it, as Pests and Traytors to the same.

But it may be againe objected, that this was a conquered Nation, & therefore by the Law of Conquest, the Conquerour might have made what alterations in the Law, or State, he pleased; but he retaining the Law, and subjecting himselfe to it (who might have advanced himselfe above it) will it therefore follow, that in so doing, he hath subjected himselfe to his people likewise? if he transgresse it, Deum habet ulterem, God will revenge it, but it was never his intent to give his people that power.

To this I answer, that retaining of the Law, and subjecting of himselfe unto it, he is bound by it, and all his Successours after him; and it were in vaine (as I have touched it before) to establish a Law, and to give none power to put it in execution: Wherefore I conceive, that that Law that bindes the King, will for the breach of the same, authorise his Parliament, though not to instict any penalty upon his sacred person, God forbid, yet to provide for the securing of him and his Kingdome; for otherwise (as the sad consequence of it would make it good) it would be, in effect, but as a dead Letter.

But now further it may be objected; Shall they have such an arbitrary way of power, as this is, to doe any thing by way of Ordinance, without the King? If this may be suffered, they may Metamorphise and change the Law, into what shape they please, or which best agrees with their humours: so that if they order, that land shall from henceforth discend to the youngest sonne, contrary to the course of common Law, (as I thinke the case was put) if this ordinance should binde the Subject, he should here at once be deprived of a double birth-right and inheritance, viz. of his land as heire, and of the Law as a Subject; which would be very hard and unreasonable.

For that part of the objection, of their arbitrary way of proceeding, I shall in part here answer it; but more fully afterwards: for the objection, that they cannot doe it by way of Ordinance, without the King: To this I answer, that in case of imminent danger (as now) the Kingdome must needs perish, if they should not have this power, for they have no other way to ayde the Kingdome in time of imminent danger, by setling the Militia of it, but by way of Act, or Ordinance, and if the King refuse, by their advice, to settle it, by way of act (as in truth he doth now) then we must of necessitie, allow a power in the Parliament, Ne percat regnum. least that the Kingdome perish, by way of Ordinance to settle the Militia, for the defence of the same; for otherwise, the King should have power, when he pleaseth, to destroy his Kingdome, and the people should be lest naked of any abilitie, to preserve and defend themselves; which were very unreasonable, and unnaturall; for nature it selfe, hath not onely established it as a Law, that all creatures may defend themselves from unnaturall violence, but hath armed them accordingly.

And now I shall prove, that as the Parliament are the most proper and onely power, to provide for the securing of the Kingdom: and as they have no other way to do it: so they are obliged to take this way: and this they are tied to by their Oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and their late Protestation; for by these they have all sworn, vowed, and protested, to defend the King, his royall person, and estate, and to be true and faithfull to him; now it is impossible for them to defend the King, and to be true and faithfull to him, if they, in time of imminent danger, do not indeavour, as much as in them lieth, to defend his kingdom; for there is such a reciprocill and dependent relation, betwixt the King and his Kingdom, that the one cannot subsist without the others for if they permit the kingdom to be destroyed, the King must of necessitie be ruined also. If the Master die, the relation of a servant must needs cease: for that relatives cannot subsist, the one, without the other. And if the kingdom fail, the King and Scepter must needs fall to the ground. And this is, in part, the reason of that pollicy of Law, in the 7. Rep. Calvins case, that the King is a body politick,7. Rep. 12. Calvins C. lest there should be an interregnum; for that a body politique never dieth.

Why then is it so, that they are bound by their Oaths to defend the kingdom, as well as the King? as in truth they are, for that the King cannot subsist without the kingdom; then the consequence must of necessity be, that the Parliament, in this time of imminent danger, hath well done in settling of the Militia, for the defence and welfare of the King and kingdom: and that in so doing, they have not onely not done more then what they might do, but they have done no more then what they were bound to do, and this under the heavie sinne of perjurie.

But here it may be objected, that this is a corrupting and dividing of the Text; for that the Oath of Supremacy doth not onely bind us to be true, and faithfull to the King, but also to defend, all Jurisdictions, Priviledges, preheminences, and authorities, granted, or belonging to his Highnesse, &c. And the having of the sole disposing of the Militia is one of the priviledges of the Crown, and appertaining to his Highnesse: and therefore we are bound likewise, by this Oath, to defend this priviledge of the Kings, against any who shall endeavour the taking it away from his Majestie.

To this I answer, and agree, that the King (as I have shewed before) hath this priviledge and prerogative given unto him, and with him intrusted by the Law for the good of the Common-wealth: but I never heard that he had it allowed him, for the destruction of the same. Again, I agree that the Oath of Supremacy obligeth every man to defend the priviledges and preheminences of the King: but I do not conceive, or beleeve, that this ought to be so construed, that any man by the Oath of Supremacy, is bound to defend the priviledges of the King, against the weal publick: for if the weal publick, and priviledges of the King, stand in competition, without question the publick interest and welfare ought to be preferred. And therefore if the King do not imploy and use his priviledges according to the trust reposed in him, but rather contrary to it: certainly this doth disoblige every man from that tie and ingagement in this particular, with which he was bound by the Oath of Supremacy. For so to construe the Oath, that I should defend the priviledges of the King, though it be in destruction of the common-wealth: were to make the Oath the most hard and unreasonable tye in the world: whereas, every Oath, amongst other qualifications, ought especially to have these two: viz. that it be explicite, I mean, without implications, or etcetera’s: and reasonable; and it would be very unreasonable for a man to swear to such a thing as would be his own destruction: but à fortiori, where it would be the destruction of the Common-wealth. And as it is said, Pereat unus, ne pereant omnes; let one perish, that all may not perish: So I say, Pereant privilegis Regis ne pereat Regnum: it were much better, that the priviledges of the King should totally cease, or at the least, be suspended for a time, then that the kingdom should be indangered.

But now I shall demand of any man an answer to this question: whether doth most stand for and defend the priviledges of the King: either he that endeavoureth to the utmost of his power to defend and support the Common-weal, in imminent danger: or he that indeavoureth the destruction and ruine of the same: this is the very difference, between the Parliament and the Malignant party: the Parliament use all means possible to defend the King and kingdom from ruine; and the malignant party use all their skill to make both for ever miserable; This question is in it self pregnant of an answer: and the very putting of the case, is a solution of the question: For, no doubt, every wise and ingenious man must needs conclude within himself, that they most defend the priviledges of the King, who most indeavour the safetie of the King and kingdom, and that is the Parliament: so that this Objection fails in the very foundation of it.

And now having answered that part of the Objection, that we ought not to defend the priviledges of the King against the Common-weal: and having likewise shewed, that he most indeavours the defence of the priviledges of the King, who seeks most the good and prosperitie of the Common-weal. I shall now answer the latter part of the Objection, that there is none that goeth about the taking away of the priviledges of the King: but onely to imploy them in defect of the King, according to the trust reposed in his Majestie. For as I have shewed before the King is tied to protect his Subjects from any forrain invasion, or domestick danger: and now the King refusing to do this, by putting of the kingdom into a posture of defence; the Parliament, according to the trust reposed in them, have, in defect of the King, and in his right, assumed to themselves this great charge, of settling of the Militia, for the securitie of the King, and people. And here I shall bid malice it self speak, whether it hath been imployed to any other end or purpose, then that for which it hath been alwayes pretended: viz. for the defence of the King and kingdom? or whether the Magazine (which is pretended to be taken from the King) wheras in truth it is imployed by the King, and for the safetie of him, and his kingdom (as I shall afterwards shew) hath been converted to any private property:4. Rep. 73. 2. or otherwise disposed of, then for the common good? and if so, certainly here is no devesting of the pretended property of the King: but that it still remaineth in statu &illegible; prius:7. Rep. 25. b. in the same state that it was at the first. But if it should be admitted, that this priviledge of the King is at this time taken from him: I conceive that it may be so, as this case is: For, as I have said before,14. H. 4. 9. it were better that the King should loose his priviledge, then that the kingdom should perish. I agree the rule of Law, that the King, regularly, cannot grant over his Prerogative; and with this accords 4. Rep. 7. Rep. 14. H. 4. 2. H. 7. 20. H. 7.2. H. 7. fo. 13. and many other books: except in some speciall cases, as in the 2. Rep. and the 5. Rep. and the difference upon the books may be this, where the Prerogative is meerly personall, and where not: where it is meerly personall, there it is not grantable;20. H. 7. fo. 8. but where it is not meerly personall, there it is: Now in our case I do conceive, and shall agree, that the ordering of the Militia of the kingdom, is a prerogative, so meerly personall in the King, that it cannot be granted over to another.2. Rep. fo. 44. 2. But it doth not therefore follow, that it can by no means be severed; especially, as in this case, when it so much concerneth the good of the Common-weal. Wherefore, I conceive clearly, that the King cannot grant this prerogative over to another,5. Rep. fo. 56. b. for that he onely is intrusted with it for the weal publick: and as we well know, parties intrusted, cannot grant their trust over: for that a trust is meerly personall, and therefore not severable. And the King can no more grant over his prerogative of protection, or power of ordering of the Militia, to another, then he can dispose of his Crown, or royall dignitie, to another: and that he cannot do,Rot. Parl. An. 40. E. 3. Nu. 8. for King John surrendred his Crown to the Pope, and this was adjudged to be void, for that it was given to him by God, and the Law, in trust, for the well governing of his people. And therefore by his own act, or grant, cannot be severed from him: For an office of trust, by the Law, is not grantable over. But on the other &illegible; we see, how that Crowns of Kings have been taken from them, by the people, as in case of R. 2. and others: I do not speak this in justification of the deposing of Princes, God forbid that I should, their persons are sacred: for that they are Gods anointed, and his Vicegerents, or Vicarii Dei, that is, Gods Vicars, as Bracton stiles them: against whom, God hath laid an inhibition, that we use not any violence, Touch not mine anointed: and therefore for my part, I conceive, that that damned opinion of the Spencers,&illegible; F. 2. called exelium Hugonis de Spencer. 1. E. &illegible; ca. 1. in the reign of E. 2. that if the King did not demean himself, by reason in the right of his Crown, that his Lieges were bound by oath to remove the King: and that if the King could not be reformed by suit of Law, that it ought to be done per aspertee, I say that, I conceive that this was justly damned, as in truth it was afterwards by two Acts of Parliament; the one in the Reign of E. 2. called Exilium Hugonis de Spencer: and the other in 1. E. 3. ca. 1.

But now, though that the King cannot grant this Prerogative over, as I have said before yet, under favour, I conceive cleerly, that it &illegible; in power of the Parliament, for the preservation of the Kingdom, in case of imminent danger, as now, to settle the Militia in hands to be confided in; for, as I have said before, the prerogative of the King must give way to the weal publique, and not the weal publique to the Prerogative of the King. For if the Prerogative of the King ought not to be advanced to the prejudice and wrong of the interest of any private man, as I have shewed before, much lesse, to the wrong and injurie of the re-publique. And with this difference ought Bracton to be understood, who saith,Bract. fo. 55. b. that, Ea quæ jurisdictionis sunt, & pacis, & ea que sunt justitiæ & paci annexa, ad nullum pertinent, nisi ad Coronam & dignitatem Regiam, nec à Corona seperari poterunt, cum faciunt ipsam Coronam. Those things that belong to jurisdiction and peace, or are annexed to them, appertain to none, but the Crown, and Royall Dignity, neither can they be severed from it, for that they make the Crown it self. Now as I have shewed before, these words of Bracton, En quæ paois sunt, &c. those things that belong to peace, must necessarily intend Ea quæ &illegible; sunt, those things that belong to warre also, for that it is impossible for the King, Absque rebus Militaribus, that is, without the Militia, to defend his people in peace and safety; And for that, that he saith, that this cannot be severed from the Crown: this ought to be understood, by his own act onely: and not that it cannot be severed from him, though in his own default, by his Parliament. For to make such a construction, were to make a Law, destructive to that, for which it was principally, and in the first place, made to preserve; and that is the Common-wealth. And the like construction and explanation of his words, Bracton &illegible; afterwards, for he saith, Ad personas, vel &illegible; transferri non poterant, nec à &illegible; persona possidori: they cannot be transferred to persons, or Tenements, nor be possessed of a private person; which cannot be otherwise intended, then of the grant of the King, for transferre, that is, to transferre, is no other then concedere, that is, to grant. And I agree with Bracton in this, that the King cannot grant over this prerogative: but this position, doth no way conclude against the power of the Parliament, as our case is.

But here Mittons case in the fourth Rep. cited before to another purpose, may be objected against me,4. Rep. Mittons case. where it is resolved, that the Queene could not take away the grant of the Office of the Clerke of the Countie Court from the Sheriffe: in which case, there is another case also cited to be adjudged by all the Judges of England, viz. that the grants of the custodies of Goals of the Counties, by the King are voyde; and the reason that is given for both these Cases, is, that the Sheriffe having these Offices appendent to his Office (as in truth they are) is by the Law responsible for all misdemeanours done in those Offices, and therefore it is against all reason, that the grant of them should be taken from him; but that he should have power, to put in such into those Offices, for whom he should answer. Now the force of the objection stands thus; if these Offices cannot be severed from the Sheriffe, because that by this he should be disabled to performe the trust reposed in him, and yet should be responsible for all misdemeanours done in those offices, which would be very unreasonable: à fortiori, you shall not take a way this priviledge from the King, for by this he should be disabled, either to protect and defend his people, as by Law he is bound, or faithfully to discharge this great trust reposed in him, as God requireth. To which I answer, that there is a great and wide difference betwixt the cases; for first, in the case of the Sheriffe, the depriving him of the grant of these Offices, concernes onely his private interest, & not the Common-weale; I meane, the Common-weale stands not in competition with the Sheriffes right, as in our case; and therefore in this, the difference is great. But, which makes the cases much more to differ: in the case of the Sheriffe, there was no act or default in him, for which to deprive him of this benefit; and it is a rule in our Law, that Quod nostrum est, sine facto, sive defectu nostro, &illegible; seu ad alium transferri, non potest; a man shall never be devested of his propertie, without his owne act, or default. But otherwise it is here in the case of the King, for, if there be no act, yet I am certaine, that there is a defect or default in the King, in refusing, in this time of imminent danger, to put the Kingdome, according to the advice of his great Counsell, in a posture of defence.

And it is no new thing, for a man to loose his interest in his own default: Upon this I might multiplie cases; but I will put onely one or two familiar and ordinary cases in our Books. If I make an estate for life, or yeares, to another, without condition expressed, yet the Lessee hath not the estate so absolute in him, but that by a tacite condition in Law, running with every such particular estate, he may, by his own default, loose his estate; and therefore if he commit wast, he subjects his estate to be evicted by the Lessor; or if he assumeth to himselfe, to grant a greater estate to another, then he himselfe hath, by this he forfeiteth his estate. But you will peradventure say, that this case doth not agree with the case in question, for that the King hath an estate of inheritance in his Crowne, which goeth in succession to his posteritie, as well as the private interest of any Subject: This I agree, but under favour, he hath this committed to him in trust; this tacite condition runneth along with it, that he use his regall power and authoritie, for the good of the publique; or if he doth not, that then his great Counsell for breach of this trust, and non-performance of this tacite condition (though that they cannot meddle with his sacred person, by dethroning of him, or devesting of him of the regall Scepter) may provide for the securing of him and his Kingdome.

Againe, it is cleare by the Law, that misuser or non-user of any Franchises, Priviledges,5. E. 4. 5. or Offices, is a forfeiture of them; but especially of any publique Offices, which concerne the administration of Justice, or the Common-wealth: and with this agreeth 5. E. 4. 8. H. 4. 20. E. 4. and my Lord Cooke in his Comment upon Littleton:8. H. 4. 18. and many other Books. Now it is as cleare, that to be a King, is an Office, though it be the greatest Office that any one, under God, can have:20. E. 4. 6. and what Office so much concerneth the administration of Justice, and the good of the Common-wealth, as this doth? and therefore, though this great office, be no more forfeitable, then it is grantable by the King:Iustit. 233. 2. for I conceive that to be regularly true in the Law, that that which is not grantable, is not forfeitable: yet, God forbid, that his great Counsell, for his misuser, or non-user of his Kingly function, should not have power, for the breach of this tacite condition, to apply themselves, by all lawfull meanes, for the securing of him and his Kingdome.

I shall compare this case, to one case onely, lately adjudged, viz. Hill. 17. Car. in the Kings Bench,Hill. 17. Car. &illegible; Banco Regli Langhams case Langhams case, where the case was thus; Langham a Citizen and free-man of London, was elected Alderman of the Citie, and being called to take his Oath, refused, for which he was committed to prison by the Court of Aldermen: upon which he prayed his Habeas corpus in the Kings Bench, and it was granted unto him: and upon the returne of the Writ, they did alledge, that they had this custome, that if any man were elected Alderman of the Citie, and refused to take the Oath, that the Court of Aldermen had used, time out of minde, to imprison the party so refusing: and then they set forth, de facto, how that Langham being a Citizen and free-man of London, was duely elected Alderman, of such a Ward; and that he being called to take the Oath, refused, and that therefore he was committed by the Court of Aldermen: and the question here was, whether the custome to imprison the body of a free-man, were a good custome, or not? and it was resolved upon solemne debate, by all the Judges of the Kings Bench, that the custome, as this case is, is a good custome: and this is the difference that was taken by them, that a custome generally for a Court of Record to imprison the body of a freeman, is no good custom, for that it is against the libertie of the Subject, and Magna Charta,9. H. 3. &illegible; by which it is enacted, Quod nullus liber homo capiatur, aut imprisonetur, &c. that is, that no free-man be taken or imprisoned; but Per legem terra, &c. by the Law of the Land. But a custome, as in this case, for to imprison the body of a freeman, for refusing to take an office upon him, which is for the support of government, and without which government cannot subsist, which by consequence, strikes at the very esse, and foundation of the Common-wealth; for that it cannot stand without government: such a custome was resolved to be a good custome. Now I shall compare this case, with the case in question: it is here resolved, that a custome for to imprison the body of a freeman, for refusing to do such a thing, which by consequence reflects upon the Common wealth, and may indanger it, that this is a good custome: now thus stands the paralell: and as the rule of Law is, Vbi eadem ratio, ibi idemjus, where there is the same reason, there ought to be the same Law. Now the same Law, that defends the Kings prerogative from violation, or separation from the Crown, doth as strongly, Et eadem jure, by the same right, defend the liberty and freedome of every private mans person from imprisonment; for, though the interest and priviledge of the King, doe farre transcend any singular and private persons, being compared with them, yet they stand in equipage, In equali jure, that is, in equall right, being compared with the Common-weale; and therefore aswell the interest of the King, as of his Subject, Debent cedere Republicæ, ought to give way to the Common-wealth: And yet we see, that as a mans person, for the good of the Common-wealth, shall be set at large, and free from imprisonment, as it is resolved in 36. & 37. H. 8. Dyer.36. & 37. Dyer. fo &illegible; &illegible; Case. Where a man was elected a Burges of Parliament, and being in execution was let at large, by a Writ of priviledge, and adjudged that his inlargement was lawfull, and that the Sheriffe was by this excused: So on the other side, a freemans person, by a private custome, contrary to Magna Charta, may for the good of the Common wealth be imprisoned: and without question, the Subject may as justly demand of the Law, the freedome of his person from imprisonment, as the King, of his prerogative, from violation, or separation; and yet no priviledge, no, not of the person it selfe, of a common person, ought to be preferred before the common good: and by the same reason, not any priviledge of the King; for, though the King be much greater, and much to be preferred, before many thousands, of individuall or particular persons; yet, without question, the universe or Common-wealth, is to be preferred before the King, or any interest or priviledge whatsoever of his: so that, for all these reasons, I conceive, that the prerogative of the King, may, as this case is, be severed from him: and therefore, that the Parliament (admitting that they have taken it from his Majesty) have done no more then what is warrantable by the Law.

But now, if all that I have as yet said, will not sufficiently justifie the Parliament in their proceedings, concerning the Militia: I shall adde a third reason to prove,&illegible; 3. that what they have done, is lawfull: and that is this; what they declare to be Law, bindes the King, by an inclusive judgement, & then their judgemennt, being the judgement of the King, and their Votes and Declarations of the Law, including the royall assent and declaration: the King cannot afterwards by a subsequent Declaration countermand his own judgement, tacitly included in theirs: and by consequence, the prerogative of the King suffers no violence; for Volenti non fit injuria, that is, a man that consents to the doing of a thing, is not injured by the thing being done. Now that their Declarations of the Law, includes the King, and shall binde him, I shall presently prove it: First, it is cleare, that the Parliament consisting of the three estates: viz. of the King,&illegible; Epist &illegible; Lords, and Commons, are a Court; and it is as cleare, that they are the greatest and highest Court in England; in which, Justice is administred by the King, in those Worthies, unto his people, in the most high and transcendent way that can be: for the King doth not appeare with that splendour and brightnesse of Justice and integritie; neither is he so true and clearely represented to his people, in those glorious rayes of his,fo. 388. &illegible; fo. 34. a. &illegible; 2. ca. 2. &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; fo. 1. 2. in any Court of Justice whatsoever, as he is, in his thrice great and honourable Court of Parliament. Now that it is a Court, and that the greatest Court in England, in the 9. Rep. Epist. ibidem, my Lord Cooke saith, that among other appellations, it is called by the name Magnæ Curiæ, &c. of the great Court, and in Pl. Com. fo. 388. the Parliament is a Court of thrice great honour and justice, &c. and Bracton 34. a. Rex habes &c. Curiamsuam, viz. Comites Barones, &c. the King hath his Court, to wit, Earles, Barons, &c. and Fleta lib. 2. ca. 2. Habes etiam Rex Curiamsuam, in Consilio suo, in Parliamentis suis, &c. the King hath his Court, in his Counsell, in his Parliaments, &c. and Crompton in his Jurisdiction of Courts, begins with the description of the high Court of Parliament, giving it the precedency in act, as well as in words: where he saith, that the said Court, is, L’treshaulte Court d’ Engliterre, that is, the thrice high Court of England: in which, saith he, the Prince himselfe sits in person, &c. And I shall conclude this with Dyer, who saith, that this Court of Parliament, is the highest Court, and hath more priviledges then any other Court of the Realme, &c. And all this is made cleare, without further saying, by this, that no appeale lyeth from this Court;Dyer fo. no reversall of their judgement, but by the judgement of a subsequent Parliament.

Then this being admitted, that the Parliament is the greatest Court in England, I shall argue thus: is the King by intendment of Law, present in all his other inferiour Courts? as in truth he is, as 21.21. H. 7. &illegible; 2. & 3. &illegible; Dyer fo. &illegible; H. 7. and 2 & 3. Eliz. Dyer. and many other books are: which certainly is the reason of the heavy judgement of these cases, of killing of a Judge upon the Bench; that that is Treason: Or of drawing of a sword to strike a Justice sitting in judgement: or of striking of a Juror in the presence of Justice, that these incurre the heavy judgement, of cutting off the right hand, perpetuall imprisonment, and the losse of lands, and goods,22. E. 3. &illegible; Fitz. &illegible; 174. as the books are, of 22. E. 3. and F. Judgement, 174. or of killing of a Messenger of the King, that goeth to execute his commandment, that this likewise is Treason, as the book is, in 22. Ass. I say, I conceive, that the reason of these cases is, for that he that offers violence to his Minister, when he is doing the service of his great Master the King: offers violence to the King himself, whose person he represents, and who by intendment of Law, is there present giving judgement: and he that strikes another in the presence of Justice, doth it as in the presence of the King himself:22. Ass. &illegible; for that what the Judge, or Minister of the King doth, in pursuance of the lawfull commands of the King, or in executing Justice, is the act or judgement of the King himself, according to that rule of Law, Qui per alium facit, per scipsum facere videtur: the act of a mans minister or servant, is the act of the Master himself.Bract. fo. &illegible; And this Bracton himself saith, treating of jurisdiction, delegated by the King, to inferiour Judges, and withall shewing and directing of those Judges Delegates, to execute righteous judgement, saith he, Tale judicium diligit honor Regis, cujus personam in judicio & judicando representant. Such a judgement the honour of the King delights in, whose person, in judgement, they represent. Why then, I say, is it thus, that the King by intendment of Law, is present in all his other Courts; and that what they do, or judge, is the act or judgement of the King himself? then certainly it must of necessity follow, (as indeed the Law is) that their judgement cannot be countermanded by the King: for this were to put Cæsar against Cæsar, the King against himself, which cannot be; for that when a Judge hath once given his judgement, he cannot afterwards countermand this judgement.

Again, is the King (as I have said) by intendment of Law present in his inferiour Courts; and is their judgement his judgement, so that by this his Majestie is estopped and concluded by his own inclusive judgement, to countermand theirs. Then, I say, à fortiori, the King, though he disunite himself from his Parliament, yet by intendment of Law, and virtually he is present in his high Court of Parliament: and therefore their judgement is his judgement: and what they declare to be Law, the King by an inclusive judgement declareth to be Law also. And if so, the conclusion must of necessity be, that the King can no more countermand their judgement, then he can the judgement of his Judges: for when Transit in rem judicatam, that is, when a thing is once adjudged, it can never after be repealed by the same judgement (as I have said) for that were a way to make judgement upon judgement, and so ad insinitum, & insinitum in iure reprobatur: the Law detests infinites. And as the King himself, cannot repeal this judgement pronounced by his Parliament: so neither can he do it, by any other advise or judgement, power, or jurisdiction whatsoever, no not by the advise, though of all the Judges of England, for that there is no power or judgement whatsoever, but is inferiour to the judgement of the high Court of Parliament; which is plain, by that, that no appeal lieth from them: and then the rule of Law binds up and supersedeth all inferiour judgements: In presentia maioris, cessat potestas minoris. In the presence of the great, the power of the lesse ceaseth. And therefore according to this rule, it is resolved in 21.Ass. Pl. 2. Ass. that because that the Kings Bench is Eier, and more then Eier: if a Commission of Eier sit in a County, and the Kings Bench cometh thither; the Eier ceaseth. And this is the reason, that when it was enacted by the Statute of 28 E. 1.&illegible; 1. ca. 5. that the Kings Bench should follow the King, that the power of the Steward of the Kings Houshold, to determine Pleas of the Crown, did cease: and that in Terme time, when the Kings Bench sits, in the same County, all Commissions cease,Rep. fo. 73. &illegible; Rep. fo. &illegible; b. as it is resolved in the 10. Rep. and in the 9. Rep. And this is the reason likewise, that when the Pope exercised jurisdiction here in England, whatsoever the Ordinary of any Diocesse might do, that the Pope, who challenged to himself supreme jurisdiction, over all Ordinaries, used to do within this Realm, as supreme Ordinary: and so he used to make Visitations, corrections, dispensations, and tolerations, within every Diocesse of this Realm, as the Ordinaries used: so he used to make Appropriations, without the Bishop: and this was held good, and was never contradicted by the Bishop, who was accounted but the inferiour Ordinary. Upon this ground, as it is said by Manwood Justice in Pl. Com.Com. fo. &illegible; In presentia maioris, cessat potestas minoris.

So I say, in the case in question, for that the high Court of Parliament, are the most supreme jurisdiction in England; what they declare to be Law, cannot be countermanded, by the judgement of any power or Counsell whatsoever: because that in the presence of the most supreme jurisdiction, the inferiour ceaseth. I do not hereby intend, that the power of the Judges, in their severall Courts, for the dispensation and execution of justice, should cease in the Terme, for that the Parliament is sitting at the same time, And the reason is obvious, for that these Courts have their proper and distinct jurisdictions, from the Parliament; and therefore cannot be superseded by it. I intend by this onely that what the Parliament hath declared to be Law, cannot, as I have said before, be countermanded by any other inferiour judgement whatsoever: for that where the powers exercise the same jurisdiction, they cannot both stand together, but the greater will cashere and suspend the lesse: so I say in our case.

But here it may be objected,Bract. fo. 55. &illegible; that the King is sons Justitiæ, that is, the fountain of Justice; and that he onely, as Bracton saith, Ordinariam habet iurisdictionem, & dignitatem & potestatem super omnes qui in regno suo sunt, habet enim omnia iurain manu sua, &c. And a little after he saith, Ea quæ iurisdictionis sunt, &c. & ea quæ sunt Justitie, &c. annexa, ad nullum pertiaent, nisi ad Coronam & dignitatem Regiam: that is, those things which appertain to jurisdiction, and justice, belong to no body, but the Crown, and royall dignity. And as all justice and jurisdiction is primarily and originally in the King, so they cannot be exercised by any other, except that they be first delegated to them by the King; And so saith Bracton a little after, Jurisdictiones, &c. non possunt à privata persona possideri, nec usus, nec executio iuris, nisi hoc datum suroit ei desuper: that is, no jurisdiction, nor execution of the Law, can be exercised by any private person, except that this power be first given unto him from the King. So Bracton treating of jurisdiction, saith; Videndum,Bract. fo. 107. &illegible; &c. quis primo & &illegible; possit & debet indicare: that is, let us see, who first, and principally, may, and ought to judge. And then he answereth, Sciendum, quod ipse Rex. & non alius, si solus ad hoc sussicere possit; cum ad hoc virtute sacramenti teneatur &illegible; that is, we must know, that the King onely, and no other, if he alone may suffice: For that he is bound to do it, by vertue of his Oath. And after in the next Chapter speaking of jurisdiction delegated, he saith,Bract. fo. 108. &illegible; Si ipse Dominus Rex ad singulas causas terminandas, non sussicias, ut levior sit illi labor, &c. he may, saith he, Constituere Justiciarios, &c. quibus referantur tam &illegible; super dubiis, quam quærimoniæ super iniuriis, &c. that is, if the King alone cannot suffise to determine all causes, that his labour may be the more easie, he may constitute Justices, to whom, as well doubts in Law may be referred, as complaints, upon injuries. And in pursuance of this, the King, not possibly sufficing to exercise all jurisdiction himself, hath in all ages, delegated power and jurisdiction to a certain number of men; and hath constituted them Judges, and dispensers of the Law under his Majestie, and in his right an &illegible; to his people.

Now all this being admitted, as in truth it cannot be denied, the force of the objection stands thus: is it so that no jurisdiction can be exercised by any, except that it be first delegated to them by the King, and that the King hath constituted certain persons, to be his Judges of the Law? why then it lieth not in the power of the two Houses of Parliament, to declare what is Law, and what not. First, because that they are not the proper Judges of it. And secondly, because that they have no such power given unto them by the King: for what power they have it is derived by their Writ, by which the King calleth them to Parliament: and this onely requireth their presence, Super dictis negotiis tractaturis: and tractare is onely to treat of or debate the Law, not to declare, or give judgement what the Law is; Besides, this word tractare is contained onely in the Writ by which the Lords are summoned to Parliament, and not in the Writ of the Commons, for by that they are called onely (as I remember the Writ is) ad faciendum & consentiendum, to do, and agree; why then they have no such power to intermeddle with the debating of the Law, much lesse to declare what the Law is.

To which I answer: That the two Houses of Parliament conjoyned (for I speak not of the power of the House of Commons distinct, and by it self) may not onely declare what the Law is, but are the best and most proper Judges of it. Are not they the ne plus ultra; that the Subject hath for redresse in matter of Law? are not they (as common experience teacheth us) the supreme Seat of Judicature? and do not they exercise a superintendent jurisdiction over all other Courts? and have not they power by a Writ of Error, brought before them, to reverse Judgements erroniously given in other Courts? Without doubt they have; witnesse that case of the Ship-money: which Judgement could not possibly have been reversed, but by the Parliament; who upon debate, declared that Judgement to be against the Law; and how miserable this Common-wealth had been: if they had not had this power, the lamentable successe, of devesting of the Subjects property, without his consent, by that damnable judgement, contrary to all Law, would have in short time, been manifested to the whole world. But to this it may be said, that in these cases, the Judges advise, who sit as assistants in Parliament, is demanded: and that in such case, the King, by his Judges, doth declare what the Law is. To this I answer, that because the Parliament may demand the advise of the Judges, who sit there to that intent, will it therefore follow that they are tied to it? or having demanded their advise: must the consequence be, that they are bound to follow it? without question nothing lesse: for this were to tie my judgement to another mans principles, which ought not to be. And it were absurd for to think, that the Parliament, who are the supreme seat of Judicature, should be tied to subscribe to the judgement of any inferiour power whatsoever. And now I shall put you one case: posite, that all the Judges of England, assembled together in the Chequer Chamber to give judgement in a point of Law, should all concurre in their judgements, and should give judgement accordingly; and after in a Writ of Error brought in Parliament, this judgement should be reversed; doe not the Parliament onely, in this case, declare what the Law is? Without question they doe; for, I suppose, that there is none so stupid, as to thinke, that the Judges advice or judgement ought or can be received in this case; for this were, upon the matter, to appeale à Cæsare, ad Cæsarem, and to reverse that Judgement (though not by the same power) yet by the same advise that gave it: which, as I conceive, by the Law ought not to be.

But here peradventure it will be againe objected,2. H. 9. 19: b. that no Writ of error can be brought in Parliament, but that the King first signes to it: and this is a consent by the King, & a giving of them power to proceed and declare what the Law is: but in our case there is no such thing, for here is nothing judicially before them, by which to authorise them to give any such judgement, and therefore they have no such power to declare what the Law is, in this case; and if they doe, their proceeding is extrajudiciall and arbitrary.

To this I answer, that true it is, that they cannot, nor ought not to take notice of any thing which concerneth any private persons, or their interest; neither can they, in any such case, give Judgement, or declare what the Law is, except they have something judicially pending before them, upon which to ground their judgement; but otherwise it is where it concerneth the Common-wealth, for there, I conceive, under favour, (especially, as in this case, in time of imminent danger) they are not tied to any legall way of proceeding, but they may, and are bound, as well by their Oaths of Alleageance, Supremacy, and their late Protostation, as by their Writ, by which they are called to Parliament, to take notice of all things, which may be obnoxious and prejudicall to the Common-wealth: and to debate, determine, and declare the Law concerning them, though that they have nothing judicially before them; for if they should, in this case, expect a complainant, the Common-wealth might perish, before that they could yeeld any ayde or assistance, for the securing of it. Now by their Oaths, they are bound to defend the King and Kingdome (as I have before said) and by their Writ they have power and authoritie given them, De imminentibus periculis tractare: and tractare, doth not onely signifie to handle, treate of, or debate; but likewise it signifieth, as the learned observe, to order, to governe, to write of, or to describe; and, without question, these words have weight, sence, and power enough in them, not onely to inable them to debate what the Law is, but also to declare what it is, after that it debated: so that I conceive, by this it is cleare, that the Parliament doe not exercise, practise, or endeavour any arbitrary way of proceeding. And the difference (as I conceive) upon the whole matter, will be this; that the two Houses of Parliament cannot (as I have shewed before) make a new Law, or alter the old Law, without the consent of the King, and this by Act of Parliament; but they may declare what the Common Law is, and this shall be obliging to his Majestie; for otherwise, this great Court, which so farre transcends all others, in other things, should be lesse in power, in this particular, then any other; Which ought not to be conceived, or imagined.

Now this being Law, which I have delivered, as I conceive it is; from hence these Conclusions may necessarily, and by consequence, be deduced; First, that the declaration of the Law,49. Ass. Pl. 8. 37. H. 8. to be otherwise by the Proclamation, or other Declaration of the King, doth not change the Law; for that it is a Rule in the Law, that the King can neither create a Law, nor alter the Law, by his Patent or Proclamation: And with this agreeth 49.Br. Pat. 100. Ass. 37. H. 8. Br. Patents 100. 11. H. 4. 10. H. 7. 5. Rep. and many other Books. Secondly, Hence a good argument may be deduced, to prove the Commission of Array, at this time illegall; for that the King,11. H. 4. 37. with the advice of his great Counsell the Parliament, hath by a tacite and inclusive consent (as I have made it good before) established the Militia; why then clearely it lieth not in his Majesties power, without their consent, to countermand this by any other Commission; for the Rule of Law is, that Eodens modo, quo, quid constatuitur, dissolvitur, that is, every thing ought to be dissolved by a matter of as high nature, as it was created: and that is the reason,10. H. 7. 23. that an Act of Parliament, cannot be repealed but by an Act of Parliament; for that no power or jurisdiction whatsoever, is so great as it selfe: and it is without question, that the Kings power or authoritie, by it selfe, is not of so high and excellent a nature, as it is joyned with his Parliament:5. Rep. fo. 55. Wherefore I doe conceive, for this reason, that the Commission of Array is absolutely unlawfull, and therefore ought not to be submitted unto. Thirdly, and lastly, Hence may be concluded, that the Kings declaration of the Law, to be contrary to what the Parliament have declared the Law to be, is Coram non Judice; that is, by one that hath not jurisdiction of the cause. First, Because (as I have said) that the King himselfe cannot declare the Law to be contrary to their judgement, for that his Majesties judgement is superseded, and bound up in theirs: and secondly, For that he cannot contradict their judgement, by any other advice or judgement, for that, that advice or judgement is inferiour to the Court of Parliament; and therefore in their presence, as to this purpose, ought to cease. And I shall compare this case, to one case onely, which is in the 10.10. Rep. fo. &illegible; the case of Marshallsea. Rep. in the case of the Marshallsea, where the case is thus; The Sheriffe who is prescribed by the Law to hold his Tourne within the Moneth after Mich, &c. held his Tourne after the Moneth, and tooke an indictment of Robbery at the same Tourne, and the Indictment being removed by a Cerciorari into the Kings Bench, by the advice of all the Justices, the partie so indicted, was discharged, for that the Indictment was utterly voyde, and Coram non Judice, because at this time the Sheriffe had no authoritie to hold his Court: so I say, in this case, the Declaration or Proclamation of the King, is Coram non Judice, for that though the King properly, and onely, ought to declare the Law, by the advice of his Judges, at another time, yet at this time he cannot, for that their judgement is estopped and superseded, by the superintendency of the high Court of Parliament: Then the Law being thus, this justifieth the proceedings of Parliament, in punishing of such, who dare adventure, against Law, to execute the Commission of Array, or to proclaime, or declare any thing in his Majesties name, against his owne judgement, and the judgement of his Parliament; for the Rule of Law is; Extra territorium jus dicenti, non paretur, impunè; he that obeys* the command of any power, out of its jurisdiction, shall be punished for it: So I conclude this point also, and conceive, that for this reason likewise, the Parliament hath done no more then what is warranted by the Lawes of the Land.

4.Fourthly, and lastly, I hold that the Parliament have done no more then what is warrantable by Law, upon this ground (which ought to be the Basia and end of all Law) viz. the common good and safetie: but of this onely a word, for that I have touched it before. That Law which is above all Law, & to which all Law ought to subscribe, is Salus Populi, the safetie of the people. True it is, that the Law was made to defend every mans private interest, as well as the Republique, but primarily and principally the Republique: it is the Rule of Law (as I have shewed before) Quod bonum publicum, private anteferri debet; that the publique good ought to be preferred before the private. And againe, we have another Rule, Quod magis dignum, &illegible; ad se quod est minus dignum, that the more worthy doth draw to it the lesse worthy: and without controversie, the magis dignum, the more worthy, is the Common-wealth; why than the minus dignum, the lesse worthy, which is every mans private concernment, must subscribe to that.

And the reason, wherefore the good and &illegible; of the &illegible; ought principally and in the first place to be maintained, and therefore is styled Suprema Lex, that is, the most supreame Law, or, if you will, a Law above all Lawes, is, for that as in the &illegible; body, if the body be in health the members must needs be well also, and if the body the sicke, the members must needs sympathise with it: so it is in the body politique, if the body be well, the members fare all the better for it, if the body be in distemper, the members own not but be distempered also; so the happinesse, or misery, of every individuall person, &illegible; upon the good or ill successe of the Common-wealth and therefore the good of the Common-wealth ought to have the first an &illegible; endeavour, of every true and faithfull member of it.

&illegible; E. 2. 27. &illegible; Rep. 139. b. &illegible; C.In 18. E. 2. which you shall &illegible; cited in the 10. Rep. Keighleyes C. a man brought an Action upon the case, against another, and the ground of the Action was, for suffering of a Wall of the Sea, that the Defendant was bound by prescription to repair, when need should be; unrepaired, so that for default of reparation; the water entred, and surrounded the lands of the Plaintiffe; The Defendant traversed the prescription, upon which they were at issue, and so was found for the Plaintiffe; and that there was a default in the wall, for not repairing, for which the Plaintiffe recovered his Damages, and a Writ was awarded to the Sheriffe, to distrain the Defendant to repair the wall, where need was hand default: Upon which my Lord Cook: maketh a speciall observation; Not a Reader, saith he, this judgement, and the reason of it, is, pro bone publico, for the common good. For, saith he, Salus populi, est suprema Lex: the safetie of the people is the most supreme Law: and therefore it is part of the judgement, in this Action, that the Defendant should be restrained to repair the wall. As if he had said, this Action is brought by the Plaintiffe, for his speciall damnification onely, and this he hath restored to him by the judgement: But yet note, for that it concerneth the weal-publiqué, the Judges considering themselves to be tied both in Law and conscience, to provide for the securing of the same, made this part of their judgement likewise, that the Defendant be compelled to repair the same; left in defect of this the Common-wealth should suffer also. Here you may see, the care that the Judges then had of the common good: It went well that this were pondered on in those dayes, in which I doubt, men are too ready and prone to prefer their own private concernment in their &illegible; I mean their honour, before the publique safetie.

Da. Rep. fo. 32. b.In Davis Reports it is &illegible; that &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; to the interest of one particular person, & yet reasonable, where it is for the benefit of the Common-wealth in generall; as a custome to make Balwarks upon the land of another for the defence of the Realm,36. H. 8. 36. H. 8. Dyer, and to raze houses in publico incendio, in a common fire, 29. H. 8. Dyer, (these cases I have remembred before) so to turn the plough up in the head-land of another, in favour of husbandry, 21. E. 4. and to &illegible; Nets upon the land of another, in favour of fishing, and navigation, 8. E. 4.Dyer fo. 60. 29. H. 8. But saith the book, a custome which is contrary to the publique good, which is the scope and generall end of all Laws (for salus populi. suprema lex) or injurious and prejudiciall to the multitude, and beneficiall onely to some particular person, such a custome is repugnant to the Law of reason, which is above all positive Laws, &c.Dyer fo. 36. 21. E. 4. 28. 8. E. 4. 28. Here note, that it is said, that the Law of reason is above all positive Laws: and no doubt but it is, for that Law, which is against reason, is rather a mystery of iniquitie, then Law: and in truth, it is no Law, which is not grounded upon the Law of reason. For as some will have it, the word (Lex) is derived, à ligando, quonian ad observandas leges, homines ligat: and no question a Law, which is unreasonable, doth not oblige men to obedience: so that it is no Law, if it be not warranted by the Law of reason. Now to apply this to the case in question; the King, by his Prerogative, ought to have the sole disposing of the Militia: the kingdom being in imminent danger, the King refuseth to settle it, by the advise of his great Counsell, for the securing of himself and his people; Now the doubt is, whether the Parliament may without the consent of the King, assume this power to themselves, for the securing of his Majestie, and his kingdom? or whether they ought to subscribe to the Prerogative of the King, though it be to the apparent destruction of the Common-weal; which of these two is the reasonable Law, is the question? Why no doubt, Salus populi, the safetie of the people: for these reasons. First, for that the Law was made for the people, and not the people for the Law. And secondly, for that the whole ought to be preferred before any part: wherefore I conclude that it is Suprema Lex; the most supreme Law, and therefore the Prerogative of the King ought to give way to this; and not this, to the Prerogative of the King: for if you preserve and maintain the common good, you preserve and maintain the Kings Majestie, his Prerogative, your Laws, and your selves; and if you do otherwise, you destroy all. And therefore I conclude all with this, Non solum conveniens est, sed necesse est, ut salus populi, sit suprema Lex: That it is not onely convenient, but necessary, that the safety of the people, should be the most supreme Law: And therefore the Parliament have done that which is agreeable both to Law and reason, in preferring of the publique safetie.

FINIS.

 


8.8. Richard Ward, The Vindication of the Parliament (15 October, 1642)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Richard Ward, The Vindication of the Parliament And their Proceedings. OR, Their Military Designe prov’d Loyall and Legall. A Treatise, wherein these things are ingeniously and sincerely handled; to wit,
1. That the MILITIA as setled by the PARLIAMENT is lawfull.
2. That it is lawfull for us to obey it, so setled by Them.
3. That the PARLIAMENT is not by us to be deserted.
4. That in aiding the PARLIAMENT the KING is not opposed.
5. That the PARLIAMENT (as the case stands) may not confide in the King.
6. That this necessary Defensive WARRE of Theirs is indubitably justifiable.
Pulchrum pro Patria mori,

LONDON, Printed in the Yeare. MDCXLII.

Estimated date of publication

15 October, 1642.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 181; Thomason E. 122 (19.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Vindication of the PARLIAMENT and their PROCEEDINGS.

THe maine thing now looked upon,What is now principally enquired after. and pried into by all eyes, is the nature of this present Martiall and Military Designe undertaken by the Parliament. Now although much hath beene writien by many upon this Subject, yet divers well disposed and well affected persons, are very unsetled and unresolved, what to thinke thereof; and the Reasons hereof I conceive to bee these; to wit.

1. That compendious kind of writing which some use in laying downe onely the particular Head, by way of assertion,5. Reasons why the vulgar sort are unsatisfied in the present expedition. without either implification, application or proofe; whence he who is not informed or thorowly insighted into the truth, and nature of that which is affirmed, is ready to conclude it a fallacie, Petitio quæsiti, & dare not beleeve it upon the Authors bare word.

2. That abstruse, sublime and high stile which others use in their writings, thinking all apprehensions as quick, and judgements as profound, and understandings as cleare as ther owne; and thus not stooping to the capacity of vulgar Readers, leave them as perplexed and as much unsatisfied as they found them.

3. That confused kind of writing which some have; for as Method doth much helpe both the memory and understanding; so immethodic all discourses doe confound both understanding and judgement.

4. That sleight and superficiall kind of writing which others have, who never searching themselves into the depth, life and bottome of the point in hand, leave their Reader just so wise as they found him.

5. That timerous and halfe handling of the case in controversie, which some are guilty of; for some have taken the point in hand, but fearing Veritas odium parit, that Truth will come home with a &illegible; face, dare not say what they can, may should or ought of the point, for the full satisfaction of their Reader; having him by this means altogether without light in the most materiall things which he undertakes to instinct &illegible;

And therefore because I will never refuse to sacrifice my life, much lesse spare any paines for the welfare, safety and &illegible; of my Countrey, the preventing of these Civill wars &illegible; composing of our present distractions, and the satisfaction of &illegible; consciences, to the utmost of my ability, I have with what &illegible; sincerity, plainnesse and clearnesse possibly I could, declared unto all, whose &illegible; to be satisfied what they may conceive and imagine of the &illegible; of the present Designe of the State and condition where in &illegible; and what seemes to be intended and aimed at by both &illegible;.

I will not trouble my selfe to search Record, &illegible; &illegible; to expound, and interpret Lawes, (being no Lawyer) but only the &illegible; lawfulnesse of this Designe, as farre as the law of Nature, the Eight of &illegible; Reason, and experience, and my small knowledge in Religion, will dictate unto me.

Exceptions taken against the Parliament.Against the Parliament two things are excepted; viz. their Act, and the Effect of that Act: or, their Action and Intention.

1. Their Action is the putting of the Kingdome into a posture of defence, by settling of the Militia without the assent of the King.

2. Their Intention herein is supposed or furnised to be the strengthening of themselves against the King, and the raising of Forces against his power. Now, of both these severally.

Concerning the Militia two quare’s are ordinarily made; to wit,

The setling of the Militia lawfull.1. Whether it be lawfull for the Parliament to settle it without the Royall assent.

2. Whether it be lawfull for us to obey it, so setled by Them?

Quest. 1.First, it may be demanded, Whether was it lawfull for the Parliament to settle the Militia [which is made the cause of all our present distractions and dangers] or not, without the Kings Royall assent.

Answ. 1.First, they did it not without asking his permission and leave; for considering the necessity of putting the Kingdome into a Posture of defence, both in regard of Forreigne and Domestick Forces and Foes: they addressed themselves to his Majesty, desiring him so to order and dispose of the Militia of the Kingdome, as it was agreed upon by the wisedome of his great and grand Councell, whose counsell above all others, Kings in Parliament time, have, and ought to embrace and follow. And therefore we may imagine that to be lawfull which our best Lawyers, yea Law-makers did so earnestly sue and sollicite for.

Secondly the Parliament continuing their humble supplications unto the King,Answ. 2. his Majestie was once graciously pleased by Message sent unto them, to promise, that the Militia should be put into such hands as they should approve of, or recommend unto Him, provided that they declared [together with the Names of the Persons] the extent of their power, and the time of their continuance, both which they did, which shewes evidently; That there was nothing unlawfull in the substance of the thing desired, [His Majesty himselfe not excepting against that] but at the most, that somthing desired by them did not square with some circumstances observed in former times.

Thirdly,Answ. 3. the Parliament seeing a necessity of settling the Militia, thought that in conscience and humane reason it was much better, fafer, and more agreeable to that trust which was reposed in them by the Kingdome, That the strength of the Kingdome should rather be ordered according to the direction and advice of the Great Counsell of the Land equally intrusted by the King and Kingdome, for the managing of the great affaires thereof, then that the safety of the King, Parliament, and Kingdome, should be left at the devotion of a few unknowne Counsellours, many of them having not beene at all formerly intrusted by his Majesty in any publike office or service, nor confided in by the Common-Wealth. And therefore we may conjecture the legality of the Militia settled by the Parliament.

Fourthly,Answ. 4. the Parliament desire not to remove the Militia from the King, but from his subordinate Ministers, (who by reason of their evill counsels given unto Him, and their small love, respect, and care shewed towards Them) the Parliament dare not conside in; and therefore onely place it upon other Ministers, whom they have no cause to suspect, nor against whom, (when they were nominated to his Majestie) He did except.

Fiftly, the Parliament long since saw,Answ. 5. and still sees (as themselves affirme) the Kingdome in so evident, and imminent danger, both from enemies abroad, and a popish discontented, and disaffected party at home, that there was an urgent, and inevitable necessitie of putting the Kingdome into a posture of defence, for the safeguard both of his Majestie and people: and in all probability, and likelyhood, if the Militia at Land, and the Navy at Sea, had not been setled in sure hands when they were, we had ere this been exposed to the practises of those, who thirst after the ruine of this Kingdome, and endeavour to kindle that combustion in England, which they have in so great a measure effected already in Ireland. Now the safety of the people being the supreame Law, it must needs be lawfull for the Parliament to settle the Militia, in case of such necessitie.

Answ. 6.Sixtly, the power given to those, in whose hands the Militia is placed by the Parliament, is onely, to suppresse Rebellion, Insurrection, and forraigne Invasion. Now that this power should be put into some hands is necessary, especially in dangerous, and distracted times; and into whose hands better, and with more safety, than such as the Parliament dare confide in, and against whose persons no exception hath beene taken by his Majestie: and therefore we need not much question the Legality of the Militia.

Answ. 7.Seventhly, this is granted on all sides, to wit, That the Common-wealth intrusts the Parliament to provide for their weale, not for their woe; and that this Parliament thus intrusted by the People, did by a Law intrust the King with the Militia, to wit, for the wealt of the Common-wealth, not for the woe thereof: and that this is implyed (in that Act, or Grant) though not exprost, no Royalist, I perswade my selfe, will question, or deny. And therefore

1. If the Kings desire, and royall intention be (as we hope it is) to settle the Militia for the preservation, not perdition, for the defence, not destruction, for the strength, and safety, and not enslaming, or envassalling of his Subiests, and people; and that this likewise is the intent, and purpose of His Grand Councell, the Parliament, then the difference who shall establish the Militia, is but a kinde of λογμαχία, or contention about words, or a ceremony, or a quarrell who shall have their will, when both purpose and resolve one and the same thing: which is to weake a ground, and too triviall a cause to draw that ruine, desolation, and destruction upon us, which must inevitably fall upon, and ceaze us, if these Civill wars which threaten us, and hang over our heads, be not prevented. But

11. If (which God forbid) the King should intend, and endeavour by the setling of the Militia, to enslave us, to tirranuize over us, and to rule us (beeing so curbed, and kept under by a strong hand of Power) by his owne will, then the Parliament, and Law did never settle the Militia upon Him for that end,Answ. 8. or, to be so used: for the equitie of the Law, and not the Letter of the Law is the true Law.

Eightly, it evidently appeares, Aliquid latet, quod non pates, That neither the Militia setled by the Parliament, nor Hull kept for the King and Parliament, nor the Magazine of Hull removed by the Parliament, are the true grounds of the Warre so violently threatned against the Parliament, by the malicious, mischeivous, and malignant partie of Papists, Cavalliers, and other ill-affected persons. For

1. There were attempts made to be possessed of Hull, and the Magazine, by Captaine Leg, and the Earle of Newcastle, before ever Sir Iohn Hotham was seized of it, (much more, before he denied His Majestie entrance thereinto) and this attempt, desire, and purpose, seemes to some, (and that not improbably) to take its rise from the Lord Digbyes letter to the Queene, wherein he desires, That the King would repaire unto some place of strength, where he may safely protect his servants, that is, such as will doe him service against his Parliament, amongst whom (most disloyally he saith) Traitors beare sway.

2. The Lord Digbie promiseth in his Letter unto his Majestie before the Militia was setled to doe him service abroad, that is, (as he expresseth himself) to procure for them supplies against the Kingdome, and Parliament, with which hee said himselfe would returne (as hee did indeed in the Ship called the Providence, with store of Armes) although he had been published, and voted a Traitour.

3. Before this, the same Lord Digby endeavoured to raise forces, under the pretence of a Guard for the Kings person in winter.

4. Before the Militia was setled, there were endeavours, to incense the two Nations England, and Scotland, and to engage their Armies one against the other, that in such a confusion, as must needs have followed; the Parliament might not be able to sit, nor doe us any good. For if in this battell we had been conquered; we might have feared to have lost our selves, and all we had, to the Conquerour with whom we fought; and if we had conquered, we might have been sure to have lost our selves, and all we had, to the Malignant Party for whom we fought.

5. Before the setling of the Militia, there were endeavours to turne the English Army against the Parliament, as is abundantly proved by them.

6. By the testimony, and allegations of many, the Irish Rebellion, (which brake forth before the Militia was setled) was hatched by the popish, and disafected party in England, not to have rested there, but to have ended here.

7. Before the Militia was setled, some Members of both Houses (who were observed to be most zealous for the speedy suppression of the Irish Rebellion, which notwithstanding, was so long protracted and delayed) were unjustly charged with Treason, and after such unjust accusation, were demanded and required of the House of Commons, by His Majestie, attended with a Troope of Cavalliers, who had intended to have taken them by force, if they had not been absent. By all which it appeares, That the setling of the Militia was not the cause why warre is made upon, or against the Parliament.

And thus much may suffice for the first quare, concerning the Parliaments setling of the Militia.

Quest. 2.It may now in the next place be demanded, whether it be lawfull for us to obey this Ordinance of the Militia thus setled by Parliament.?

Answ.In case of extreame danger, and of his Majesties refusall, people are obliged, and ought to obey (by the Fundamentall Laws of this Land) the Command, and Ordinance agreed upon by both Houses, or the major part of both Houses (which is all one) for the Militia. I enlarge not this Answer, because that which followes concerning the deserting of the Parliament, may be applied hereunto.

Thus much may suffice for the first exception taken against the Parliament: viz, Their action, in putting the Kingdome into a warlike posture of defense, by setling the Militia in such hands, as they durst trust.

I proceed now unto the other Exception, (viz) the fruits, and effects of the setling of the Militia, which are affirmed to be, the opposing of the Kings precepts and proceedings.

We affirmed before, That if the Militia had not beene settled, we had beene in great danger of destruction; and now when it is setled we are neither free from feares, nor foes, enemies nor evils. Whence it may be demanded,Quest. 3. How may we be preserved from that ruine, and destruction which hangs over our heads.

Answ. 1.First, by standing upon our Guard.

Answ. 2.Secondly, by siding with and assisting of those who stand for us.

Answ. 3.Thirdly, by resisting and opposing those who withstand us.

This Question is something like Hydra’s heads, for from this little Head, foure maine ones sprout and spring up; to wit,

1. Whether the Parliament may be deserted, or ought to be assisted?

2. Whether the King may be disobeyed, or his Commands opposed?

3. Why the Parliament dare not confide in the King, seeing he promiseth as much as they can desire?

quest. 4.4. Whether this Warre undertaken by the Parliament be warrantable and lawfull? Now of all these in this order.

It may first of all (I say) be demanded, Whether we may desert the Parliament in this time of danger, or is it our duty to obey, assist, aide and stick to them.

First, whatsoever is said of this Subject, in that Treatise called,Answ. 1. Reasons why this Kingdome ought to adhere to the Parliament, I wholy omitt; as also many Reasons which might have beene drawne, from a Tractate, which by many solide arguments justifies the Scottish Subjects for their defensive Warres.

Secondly, our Saviours rule is here worthy observation,Answ. 2. Whatsoever you would, that others should do unto you, doe so unto them. Make the case ours, by supposing us in their places, and they in ours, that is, We Parliament men, and they private persons; and looke what aide, and assistance we would expect, and desire from them, if we were in such danger, as now they are, the same we should now affoord unto them.

Thirdly, I dare not say,Answ. 3. that with a blind obedience we should actively obey them in whatsoever they command: for as Councels in Divinity, so Parliaments in Policy, may erre: and therefore inquisition, disquisition, examination, and conference are not forbidden us in any Acts or Statutes.

Fourthly, the Members of the Parliament, are chosen by us,Answ. 4. and stand for us, yea, are sent thither, intrusted by us with all we have, (viz) our estates, liberties, lives, and the life of our lives, our Religion, and the safety of the Kings Person, and Honour: and therefore in equity, and conscience they ought not to be forsaken of us.

Fiftly the Parliament men are no other then our selves,Answ. 5. and therefore we cannot desert them, except we desert our selves, the safety of the Commons, and Common-wealth being wrapped up in the safety of the Parliament. As the Wolves desired the sheepe to put away the dogs, and then they would enter into a League with them, but when they had by so doing stript themselves of their best friends, and laid themselves open to their fiercest foes, they were then devoured without pity: even so may we feare it will be with us, if we should be so sottish as reject, and desert the great, grave, and grand Councell of the Land, (which consists of as wise, faithfull, meeke, moderate, sincere, just, upright, understanding, zealous, and pious Patriots, as ever any Parliament in this Land was possessed, and consisted of) and submit our selves to the protection, and care, of obscure, and unknowne, yea malignant, and malicious Counsellours, who would glory so much in nothing as in our misery, and Ruine, as appeares by their deeds wheresoever they come, if they can but prevaile.

Sixtly the Kings Majestie hath promised (in His-Message. January,Answ. 6. 12. 1641.) That He will be as carefull of his Parliament, and of the priviledges thereof, as of his Life, and Crowne, and therefore if He assure them so of His adhering unto, and care of them, then much more should we encourage them, by Promising to assist them (so long as they stand for us, and our Lawes) with our estates, and them.

Answ. 7.Seventhly, we ought to obey, and assist them in any thing which is lawfull, and we ought not to suspect, that they will enjoyne, or command us any thing as lawfull, which is unlawfull. The opposition betweene the Kings Majestie and His Parliament, seemes to be about law, He affirming that to be lawfull, which they denie, and they affirming that to be lawfull, which He proclaimes illegall. Now the King is pleased to professe, That he is no Expounder of Law, that belonging neither to His Person, nor Office; and therefore concerning the legality, and illegallity of things. He will be guided by the judgement and counsell of others: And whose, or what counsell (in all probability, and reason) can be better, sounder, sincerer, and more worthy to be followed, then that of his Grand Councell? who assure us that what they doe and enjoyne us to do is lawfull, that is, according, and agreeable to the Law, either of God, Nature, or the Land. Now it becomes us (whom they represent (thus honourably, and venerably to thinke of Them, viz. They know such and such things to be lawfull, and therefore they do them themselves, and enjoyne them to us. And not thus (as some pervert it) The Parliament hath done, or commanded such, or such things; and therefore doe affirme them to be lawfull, and just: for it is a principle in law, That no unworthy, or dishonourable thing is to be imagined, or presumed of Parliaments.

Answ. 8.Eightly, if we desert and now forsake the Parliament, we shall be found guilty before God of three great sins; to wit,

1. Persidiousnesse; for as we have intrusted the Parliament with our estates, liberties, and lives; so we have engaged our selves, to maintain, and defend them, so long as they pursue our safety, prosperitie, preservation, and peace, according to Law. And therefore, if for our good, or for discharging of their consciences, and trust, they be endangered, we are persidious if we leave them, and for lacke of succour let them sinke and perish.

2. Perjurie; for all who have taken the Protestation, have promised, protested, and vowed, with their lives, power, and estate, to defend, and maintaine all those who stand for the lawfull rights, and liberties of the Subject; yea, to oppose, and by all good wayes and meanes to endeavour to bring to condigne punishment, all such as shall either by force, practise, counsels, plots, or otherwise, withstand or endanger those who stand for our Lawes, and Liberties. Now who stand more, for our Religion, Lawes, Soveraigne, and Liberties, then our Parliament? and who are more opposed and endangered for their zeale, and care for us, and our Priviledges than They? And therefore we are guilty of Perjury before God, and Man, if we in this case assist them not, but desert them.

3. Treacherie; for such as forsake the Parliament, as the case now stands, are guilty of a manifold Treason: to wit, against the Church, against the State, against the Representative body of the Land, and against themselves. For by deserting of the Parliament, and suffering it to be trampled under foot, by Papists, Atheists, prodigals, Delinquents, Antiparliamentaries, and Viperous Monopolists, and Projectors; we betray

First, The Church to errour, and heresie.

Secondly, The State to ruine, and miserie.

Thirdly, The Parliament to bloud, and crueltie.

Fourthly, Our selves to poverty and slavery. And therefore I may truly and boldly say, That it is those who desert the Parliament, who are the Principall causes of all the bloud which is, hath, or shall be shed in this Warre, and of all the burning, plundering, ravishing, and theeving, where with the poore Subject hath, or shall be oppressed.

Ninthly,Answ. 9. we may not vow (when things are come to maturitie and height, and the cursed conception is come to a birth) desert and fall from our Parliament because there hath beene long great jealousies, of some greivous mischeife, to be intended against our Church and State, by those who are enemies to both. Here note, that the jealousies which men generally have had, that there was, and is still some designe a foot, for the ruine and destruction of the Parliament, and of us through their sides, and of introducing, yea establishing of Popery, and of abolishing of Protestantisine in this Land, are these and the like: to wit,

1. That Army of 8000. Irish Papists, which was raised by the Lord Straford, and ready to come over, either to further the Warre with Scotland, or (if that jarre were composed) to joyne with the English Army against the Parliament.

2. The endeavours and courses which were taken, to bring our English Army out of the North, either to destroy the Parliament, or to awe and compell it, and take away the freedome of it.

3. The two Letters sent to Mr. Bridgeman, Ian. 14. 1641. and to Mr. Anderton, which intimated some sudden, sad and sorrowfull blow to be intended against the Puritanes in and about the Citie of London; and declared many things of deepe and dangerous consequence, which (considering many passages in the State since) seeme not to be faigned or forged; but to foretell dangerous and divilish practises really intended against the City, Country, and Parliament, by the Popish Faction.

4. The accusing of the 6. worthy Members of Parliament, against whom (as yet) no proof hath been brought, nor no particular instances produced (as hath beene againe, and againe promised) of any treachery treason or high and treacherous misdemeanors, practises or plotts.

5. His Majesties going into the House of Commons, attended neither with his ordinary Gaurd, only, nor Pentioners and Servants only but with diverse Cavaliers armed who by their words and gestures showed themselves to bee men of desperate resolutions and bent them upon some damnable, and bloody designe.

6. The endeavours used to the Gentlemen of the Innes of Court.

7. The Rebellion in Ireland, which was raised for the diversion and interruption of the Parliament, for the weakning of our Land, by the maintenance of that, and for the strengthening of the Papists and Popish Faction with us. For when the English Protestants had beene plundered, pillaged, subdued and slaughtered there, (as it was reported, confessed and acknowledged by divers of the Rebels, when they were taken) they should have come hither to have assisted our Papists and Malignants, to have done as much to and with us.

8. The calling in diverse Cannoneers, and other Assistants into the Tower of London.

9. The making of Lunsford (a man of a knowne and notorious debach’d life and conversation) Lieutenant of the Tower; for he being so apt and fit a man for any desperate designe, or divellish practise, and in that place, having so much command over the City, made all generally feare, that there was more mischiefe intended against the City, then did out wardly appeare.

10. The selling of the Crowne Jewels beyond the Seas, and buying therewith Field-pieces, Pieces for Battery, Culverings, Morter-peices, Carabines, Pistols, Warre-saddles, Swords and Powder, as appeared by the note of direction which was sent over, and found among the Lord Digbies Papers. Now although these were bought in June; yet we must imagine (as appeares by the time when they were writ for) that they were bespoke, and that order was given for the providing of them long before.

2. The fortifying and guarding of Whitehall with Ammunition, in an unusuall manner, and with men of turbulent spirits; for some of them with provoking language and violence abused divers Citizens passing by; and others with their swords drawne wounded sundry other Citizens passing by (who we unarmed) in Westminster Hall.

12. The drawing away of many Members of the Parliament, by Messages and Letters from the Parliament, That the Actions of both Houses might be blemished and reported to be the Votes onely of a few, and an inconsiderable number, yea rather the Acts of a Party, then of a Parliament.

13. The force raised at Yorke, and the Ammunition provided beyond Sea, for to be sent unto Yorke that force being gathered (as was feared) to make an opposition against the Parliament, but evidently percieved to be imployed for the protection, and support of Delinquents.

14. The multiplying of Papists in this Land of late dayes their frequent meetings at certaine places in and about the City without controule, the audaciousnesse of their Preists and Jesuites with us, notwithstanding our strict and severe Statutes against them, the residence of the Popes Nunntio so long amongst us, the Colledge of Capuchius in or here unto Coven Garden, and the favouring and prefering principally such as were either Popish, or Arminion, who in some points are true Cozen Germanes.

15. Lastly his Majesties absenting of himselfe from his Parliament, withdrawing from them thereby both his presence and influence. Here note That after the King was councelled, and perswaded hereunto, this his absence followed and attended with this Doctrine, againe and againe iterated, viz. That the King absenting, dissenting, and severing of himselfe from his Parliament, it was no Parliament neither had they any Power to dispose of any of the weightie affaires of the Kingdome; which dangerous Doctrine seemes to have beene taught by Court slatterers for these ends viz.

1. To discourage, weary and quite tire out our couragious, and indesatigable Senate.

2. To divert, interupt and retard their consultations, and designes both for our owne Reformation, and the subduing of the Irish Rebels.

3. To take off peoples hearts from the Parliament, to stagger them in their obedience unto them, to coole their zeale for the preservation and defence of them, and to make them call in question all their proceedings

4. To annimate all those who stood disaffected to the Parliament, to show their disaffection, and opposion with more freedome and lesse feare.

Tenthly, and lastly to this maine question, whether the Parliament may be deserted or ought to be adhered unto, I answere that of (of necessity) some wee must adhere and stick unto, that is either to the grand and knowne Councellours of the Land, or to obscure and private Councellours, that is either to the Parliament, or to the Cavalliers, Papists, Malignants, Delinquents and dissaffected Persons of the Kingdome.

Now because Contraria jnxta se posita clarius clucescunt, contraries are best commentaries, wee will looke particularly upon both and consider the nature, ends and aimes of both, and from thence coniecture whom wee may best desert, and whom with most safety follow; and first I begin with the Cavalliers, and that side.

First, in that side which consists of Cavalliers, Papists, Malignants, Delinquents, ill-affected and Popishly affected Persons, or (to terme them onely so) evill, private and obscure Councellors, wee have these two things to observe, to wit; First, their intentions and endeavours: Secondly, their nature and ends.

First, their intentions, endeavours and the fruit of their Councells; for I conioyne them altogether.

1. Their intentions and endeavours were to raise Civill Warre, and that both first in Scotland, and afterwards in Ireland, and now in England; And

2. To perswade the King to rule by his owne Will. The Lord Faulkland tels us, That the King was perswaded by his Divines that in conscience, by his Councellours that in policie, and by his Judges that by law he might doe what he list. Which doth directly labour to raze the very foundation of our well founded State, and to introduce and reare amongst us an Arbitrary Government. And

3. They endeavour to make division betweene his Majesty and his Parliament, (whom God and the Lawes of this Land have united in so neere a relation) as appeares.

First, By their endeavours and perswasions to draw the King from his Parliament, which they have effected now for a long time, and still continues his absence from them; although (I thinke) the most Shires in England have most humbly petitioned and besought Him to rejoyce and revive all the drooping, dead and sad hearts of his People, by affording his much and long desired presence, unto his Parliament. If these Persons (whatsoever they are) who thus counsell the King to estrange himselfe from the Parliament, and to oppose and disgust all their Proceedings, and designes, were but Masters of Hull, the Militia, and Navy, they would then quickly master both the Parliament and all the Kingdome; who could expect but bad quarter from such Masters, who by their counsels and endeavours to divide the King and Parliament shew that they are neither friends to the Common wealth, nor favourers of the publique safety; And

Secondly, By their feare that the King should accord with his Parliament. For the Malignants and evill Counsellours stand in great feare That his Majesty is too inclinable to an accommodation with his Parliament, which above all things they abhor fearing thereby to be undone, that is, to lose the spoile, pillage and possessions of this Land, which they have long since hoped for: whence they have solicited the Queene to disswade the King by all meanes from such accommodation, hoping to obtaine their desires (the ruine of this Land) by the Queenes interposing. See the Lord Digbies Letter to the Queene, March 10. 1641. and Mr. Eliots Letter to the Lord Digby. May 27. 1642.

4. They endeavour to cast aspersions upon the Parliament, perswading the People, That the Parliament would set up a Aristocracie, take away the Law, and introduce an arbitrary government; a report so false that no man of common sense or reason can credit it.

5. They have and doe still endeavour and combine together to effect end worke the ruine of the Parliament, or at least to force it, and by forcing thereof to cut up the freedome of Parliament by the root, and either to take all Parliaments away, or (which is worse) make them the instruments of slavery, to confirme it by Law, as the Parliament in Rich. 2nds, time did, when they found the Kings anger against them, and feared the peoples for saking of them. See the Treatise called, The successe of former Parliaments.

6. The fruits and effects of the intentions, and indeavours of those evill Counsellours, have been nothing but contention, dissention, division, debate, decay of trading, and more &illegible; then would fill a volume, if we should consider all the distractions distresses, dangers, feares, discommodities, hinderances, and losses, which both England, Scotland, and Ireland have felt, undergone, and sustained by their counsels, designes, and plots.

And thus much for the Intentions, and indeavours, of evill counsellors, and the fruits, and effects of their evill counsels.

Secondly, we have now to consider, the nature, and ends of these evill counsellours, who desert, and oppose the Parliament.

1. They are men of lost estat. 8, and desperate fortunes; and these aime onely at plundering, and pillaging, desiring to raise themselves by razing others, and to build up themselves upon their brethrens ruine.

2. They are Rapist., and popishly affected persons. The Citizens of London (in their petition presented to the House of Commons, December 11. 1641. testifie. That information is given to divers of them, from all parts of the Kingdome, of the bold and insolent carriage, and threatning speeches of the Papists. Now those aime either at the introducing and establishing of Popery amongst us, by the change of religion, or at least, at the gaining of freedome to professe, or an open toleration of their idolatrous, and superstitions religion. Which because they can never expect, nor hope for, from the Parliament, (which labours so zelously for the reformation of our Church, and the abolition of all popery, and popish innovations) they therefore joyne, and side with the former sort, which seeke nothing but mischeife and ruine. Or

3. They are Delinquents, Malefactors, and guilty Persons, who have by some plotts, practises, monopolies, Projects, or otherwise, trespassed and transgressed highly against the Common-wealth for their owne private advantage and profit. Now these hope, that by siding with the Cavaleirs and Papists against the Parliament, they shall bee protected against it and the justice thereof. Or

4. They are the ministers of the Land, who are corrupt either in Life or Doctrine; that is, are either superstitious, ceremonious, contentious, covetous, Popish hereticall scandalous in their lives and conversations or slothfull in the discharge of the worke of their ministry. Now these hope by siding with the former, to keepe, and hold fast what they have fearing the justice of the Parliaments will (for their demerrits) deprive them of those spirituall or ecclesiasticall dignities and possessions which they hold and injoy; Or,

5. They are of that number of the Nobility or Gentry of the Land, whose lives have been very loose, & unbridled. Now these oppose the pious proceedings of the Parliament, least such restraint should be imposed upon them by that Reformation which is intended and indeavoured by Them that they may (without punnishment) live as they list, have done and desire still to doe; Or

6. They are ignorant Persons. Now there is a two fold ignorance viz.

1. Naturall; now they are naturally ignorant who for want of knowledge understanding, and teaching are neither able to discerne of the designes, and intentions, of the adverse Partie, nor to foresee the miseries which will come upon them by aiding and assisting of, and siding with them: nor to know what is their duty and how farre and in what cases they may aid and assist the Parliament against some personall or verball command of the King; And,

2. Affected: Now this mischevous, malitious, and affected ignorance is in those who will neither read, nor heare any thing which may inform them in the former particulars, viz. the nature intentions ends and fruites of evill councels, and counsellours: and what is their duty in regard of the great counsel of the land. Or,

7. They are of that number of the Nobility, and Gentry, who seeke preferment by betraying their Country, to serve, and be made subject to the Court. Or,

8. They are the allyes, friends, acquaintance, and associates of some of the former; who although in themselves they stand not much disaffected to Parliaments, yet in regard of their friends, they leave it, and cleave unto them. Or,

9. They are timerous and fearefull: who although they wish well unto the Parliament, yet they dare not shew their affection, nor affoord any aid unto them, lest thereby they incurre some malice, or detriment through the Kings displeasure, Or.

10. They are covetous, and desirous to keepe their mony, and meanes: and therefore (whatsoever their heart, and affections be unto the Parliament) they dare not shew their approbation of their proceedings, lest they should be wrought upon to supply them, and their wants, for the support of the State, their necessities, and occasions, in regard of the land, being great, urgent, and pressing. Or,

11. They are Macchiavillians, and Polititions; who desiring with the Cat to fall on their feet, and to be free from blame and danger however the world wags, will neither side, nor support, neither aid, nor asset, either King or Parliament.

Let us now seriously consider three things from what hath beene said of the nature of this Side, or Party, viz.

First. who are those evill Counsellours which we must not adhere unto, but desert? It is denyed, That there are any such about the King; but I conceive, what I shall say, will not be gainsayd, viz. If there bee any about the King, who first move him to Civill warres, and secondly, perswade him to rule his people according to his owne Will, or an arbitrary power, and thirdly, strive to divide, and estrange the King from his Parliament, and fourthly, cast (even in his eares) aspertions, and false calumnies upon his Parliament, and fiftly, labour to ruine, and destroy the Parliament, and sixthly, by their plots brings misery and confusion upon the whole land: none (I say) will deny, but these are evill and wicked Counsellours, who deserve to be disclaimed, deserted, and left free, and layd open to the penalty of the law. Now that there are some such about the King, or in high favour, power, and credit with Him, is more then evident (though I, and wiser then I, cannot particularly name them) for,

1. His Majesty professeth a detestation of warre, and yet prosecutes it, which shewes that some puts him upon it. And,

2. He protests to governe his people according to established law, and yet he hath been perswaded to an Arbitrary governement, by them about Him, by many plausible, and faire seeming arguments, as Himselfe affirmes in one of his Messages. And,

3. He solemnely professeth his love unto, and his care of, and his honourable respect to his Parliaments and their priviledges, and preservation; and yet some hath withdrawne his person from the Parliament, and to himselfe, vilified the Parliament, yea have had plots upon the Parliament, and have laboured that in them, they might be countenanced, and protected by his sacred Majesty, And,

4. The King againe and againe calleth God to witnesse, the sincerity of his heart towards all his people, and how earnestly desirous He is that they may live happily, and prosperously under him; and yet by following the counsell of some, many, great, and long evills have pressed all the three Kingdomes of England, Scotland, and Ireland. And therefore it must needes be granted, That there are malignant Counsellours about the King, who worke much misery, and mischiefe, both to Himselfe and his People; and that they cannot be unknowne unto Him, if He would please, to disclose, discover, and leave them to the just, and equall triall of the Lovers of the Land.

Secondly, let us consider from this Army of Maliguants, and mischievous Counsellours, and party, what in all probability we may expect, and looke for if they prevaile against the Parliament. That is, if,

  • 1.  Men of desperate fortunes prevaile, what can we expect but plundering and pillaging? And,
  • 2.  If Papists prevaile, what religion but Popery?
  • 3.  If delinquents, what but oppression?
  • 4.  If bad Ministers, what but bad preaching, and ill practizing?
  • 5.  If loose Gentry, what but prophannesse?
  • 6.  If ambitious spirits, what but contempt, cruelty, and disdaine?
  • 7.  If ignorant persons, what but their owne selfe-wills?
  • 8.  If delinquents and malignants friends, what but such a measure as we finde from delinquents, and malignants themselves? But from an Army consisting not of one, but of all these, what can we expect, but all these evills? and from the wickednesse which will be committed by them, the heavy judgment of God to be hastened downe upon us.

Thirdly, let us consider, whether there be any the least probability of receiving any benefit, or profit, in any regard, from this Side or Party, if they should prevaile against the Parliament.

  • 1.  Can we expect that the propriety of our goods shall be maintained, and preserved unto us, by men of decayed, lost, and desperate fortunes? Or,
  • 2.  Can we expect that the true orthodoxe Protestant Religion shall be maintained, and preserved, by heterodoxe, and hereticall Papists? Or,
  • 3.  Can we expect to be preserved free from unjust impositions, and taxes, by oppressing Projectors, and Monopolists? Or,
  • 4.  Can we hope that our Parliament priviliges will be preserved by Delinquents, and contemners of Parliaments? Or,
  • 5.  Can we expect the propagation of the Gospel, or that the sincere, faithfull, painfull, and profitable preaching thereof, shall be promoted by lewd, lazy, and corrupt Ministers? Or,
  • 6.  Can we expect that Piety, and the honour of God, shall be preserved in the land, by loose and prophane Gentlemen, and Nobles? Or,
  • 7.  Can we expect that justice, just measure, and equity, shall be maintained by those who ayme at nothing but their owne gaine, and greatnesse? Or,
  • 8.  Can we expect that our Lawes shall be preserved inviolably, by those who are wholely bewitched with the love of an Arbitrary Governement? Sense, and Reason will tell us, that these things cannot be expected from those persons; neither that any good can come unto the Land from such an Army.

I might conclude this last Answer, to that maine Question, Whether the Parliament be to be obeyed or deserted? as I began it: to wit,

Argum.To our Side of necessity we must adhere and cleave, that is, either to the evill, and obscure Counsellours, or to the Parliament.

But we must not adhere and sticke to the evill and malignant ones, for those reasons specified before.

Therefore we must adhere and cleave close to the Parliament.

This argument (I say) together with what hath been spoken against the Malignant party, might be sufficient for the amplification of the last Answer: but as I have said somthing against the one party, so I will say something for the other, as I promised, for the better fastning and setting of the Truth home upon the heart, of whosoever will vouchsafe to excuse this Treatise.

Secondly, in that Side, or party, which consists of the great, and grand Councell of the Kingdome, I will (as in the other Party observe divers things, for the amplification of this truth, That the Parliament ought not to be deserted, but obeyed, and assisted: to wit.

  • 1.  The ends of Parliaments.
  • 2.  Their necessity.
  • 3.  Their excellency.
  • 4.  Their utility.
  • 5.  The reason why we ought to believe ours.

First, the ends of Parliaments are briesly these two: to wit.

  • 1.  That the interest of the people might be satisfied.
  • 2.  That the King might be better counselled.

Secondly, the Necessity of this Parliament shewes it selfe by the miserable and distressed condition wherein our Land was, and the multiplicity of agrievances we groaned under; as is to the life declared, in the Parlioments Remonstrance of the State of the Kingdome, set forth December 15. 1641.

Thirdly, the Excellency of Parliaments is declared by his Majestie himselfe, who doth highly extoll the constitution of this Governement of ours, and especially the nature of our Parliaments, which consist of King, Peeres, and Commons; acknowledging that the power which is legally placed in both Houses, is more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of tyranny. Which argues plainely, that there is much, and great power, (and that by Law) placed, and put into the hands of both Houses, or the Major part of both for the good, and preservation of Peeres, and Commons, when the Common-wealth, or Whole is in danger, and the King being seduced by wicked Connsell, doth desert, and refuse to joyne with them in their owne defence. For if they cannot do any thing (upon any occasion, necessity, extremity, or danger, though never so evident, apparent, or urgent) without the King, then the sole power of managing the affaires of the Kingdome, doth even in arduis, in high, yea in the highest cases, belonging onely unto the King; and nothing at all to either, or both Houses, except, or but what he alleages. That is, though the Land say a bleeding, and were invaded by Hoasts, and Armies from abroad, and Papists, and Rebells at home (Ireland now is) and the King would make no provision against them, or, for the suppressing, and withstanding of them, the Parliament must sit still, and suffer all to be lost, and ruined, having neither power to raise, nor use any force without the thing.

Fourthly, the Vtility, and Benefit of Parliaments is great: and that both,

1. To Kings, and Princes; and that,

1. In regard of their reputation, same, and honour. Antonius &illegible; is greatly renowned for communicating all weighty affaires, und following publike advice, and approbation in all great expedients of high concernments; and He was more honourable, and prosperous therein, then was Nero, who made his owne will his Law. And thus alwaies those Princes have gained unto themselves most honour and renowne, who were most willing and ready to listen to the Counsell of the Land in important affaires. And also

2. In regard of their Crowne, state; for the Kings of England by this representative Body of their People, are alwayes assisted, and that upon all occasions: as for example.

First, If they lack money for any necessary occasion, the Parliament supplies them.

Secondly, if they be invaded by any forraigne or domestique soe, or force, the Parliament assists them.

Thirdly, if they be injured, reproched or dishonored by any potent person or Prince, the Parl. wil vindicate and avenge them. All which were seene evidently in Q. Eliz. time, between her and her Parliament, And

Fourthly, I may ad, that none of our Princes were ever yet happy without the use of Parliaments: and therefore it is plaine that they are beneficiall & utile unto Princes, and consequently not to be deserted of subjects which are loyall to Princes.

2. As Parliaments are usefull and utile to Princes, so they are also beneficiall and profitable unto People: as appears by 3. particulars, viz.

1. Without Parliaments People have no possibility of pleading their own rights, & liberties, they being too confused a body to appearin vindication of their proper interests. Whence it comes frequently to passe, that what all should look after, no man does, and what is committed to no man thinks his owne charge: and therfore some few chosen out by, and from amongst the People, to consider of their liberties, lawes and grievances, must needs be very advantagious unto them.

2. As people cannot without confusion plead for themselves, so often the subordinate Magistrates, and Iudges of the Land (through feare, flattery, or private corruptions) doe often betray the peoples rights, by unjust sentences or verdicts: and therefore such Counsellours as can have no private aymes, or ends of their owne; but are themselves involved in the same condition with the people, both in weale, and woe must needs be profitable for them. Yea,

3. By this present Parliament we have reaped already many great, and notable benefits; and therfore may conclude from our owne ezperience, with a Probatum est, That Parliaments are bene ficiall to people. By this Parliament we are free from these two grievous arbitrary Courts, the high Commission (the Purgatory of the Church) and Satr-chamber, (the terrour of the Common-wealth) as also from the heavy burthen of Ship-money, and the oppressions we groaned under by reason of Monopolies, and other illegall impositions, yea Bishops removed out of the House of Peeres, who having their dependance upon the King, for the most part would side with him, in any thing, though it were adjudged by the Parliament to be destructive and hurtfull to the Kingdome. This particular is so abundantly amplified, and that so truely, by the Parliament in their Remonstrance of the state of the Kingdom, set forth Dec. 15. 1641. that I will not enlarge it; but only conclude, that if the ends, necessity, excellency, and benefits of Parliaments be such as hath been shewed, then They are worth standing for, and ought not to be deserted. Now

Fiftly, we will take a short view of some particular reasons why we ought ta beleeve, & obey this our present Parl. and not relinquish it. viz.

1. Because they can have no by ends, nor base respects of their own: for if they aimed at promotion, preferment, and wealth, they might much easilier attaine those, by complying with, then by opposing the designes and personall commands of the King. It is (or at least hath been) an approved Maxim, that a community can have no private ends to mistead it, and to make it injurious to it selfe: and I never heard nor read so much as one story of any Parl. freely elected and held, that ever (for any ends of their own) did injure a whole kingdom or exercise any tyranny over the land (but divers Kings have done sundry acts of oppression) for nothing can suit or square with the common Councell, but only the common good, and therfore it is great reason that we should beleeve & obey them. And

2. Because no benefit at all can redound unto them by faigning, forging, or counterfeiting of false fires, feares, chymera’s, and dangers which are not. And therfore we may they better beleeve what they say. And

3. Because we never yet found them false unto us. It was the saying of one, If my friend deceive me once, I wil blame him, but if twice, my self? meaning, that he would never trust him the second time, who deceived him once. Now charity perswades us to hope, and believe, where we see nothing to the contrary; and give credit to them in whom we never saw any designes or indeavours, to betray us, or our liberties, but rather alwayes the contrary. And,

4. Because they know more then any one of us. Two eyes (we say) sees more then one; and the Parliament is the eies, and the eares of the re-publique, and their information, conference intelligence, experience, knowledge, &c. doth afford unto them some sight and insight into all things, passages, occasions, affaires, negotiations, &c. both at home and abroad. And therfore it is not without cause, that we should beleeve them. And

5. Because they never shewed any disloyalty unto the King, that ever yet was observed by the Commons or Commonwealth, whom they represent. We find in all their Petitions, royall expressions, humble suits, hearty intreaties unto his Ma: to comply with them for his owne honour & safety, cordiall Potestations of the sincerity of their intentions towards his Ma: and free and full promises neither to spare pains, purses, persons, nor estates, for the defence of his person, & preservation of his honor; yea unwearied & (beyond humane patience) continued supplications to his notice of personall imputations, yea reproachfull aspersions, that hath bin cast upon them; still taking (as much as possibly they can) all blam from his Majesty, and laying it upon his evill counsell. And

6. Because the King himselfe doth not accuse the Parliament, but onely some few particular persons therein; and therefore that which comes, or is commended unto us by the whole Parliament, we may believe, and obey, his Majesty promising to protect them, and their priviledges, and to except them in all his taxes, and accusations. And,

7. Lastly we may believe, obey, and adhere unto the Parliament, because the King of Kings seemes to favour their proceedings. How doe we see the Lord blowing upon all the devices of their enemies, sometimes turning them back upon themselves, and sometimes turning their wisedome into foolishnesse. Or what counsels, what letters, what plots, and practises, what words, and passages, against Kingdome and Parliament, hath strangely been discovered, prevented, and come to light, to the joy and rejoycing of Parliament and people, and the terrour and amazement of the contrivers, and authors of them. How extraordinarily hath the Lord assisted that honourable Assembly with zeale, courage, wisedome, discretion, prudence, moderation, patience, and constancy in all their consultations and desires? How hath the Lord preserved their Persons from imminent perill, and given them favour in the eyes of all Counties, not withstanding the base, and bitter as persions cast upon them by some? When they had cause to be discouraged, by reason of the strong opposition of Delinquents, and disaffected persons, what encouragments have they even then found, from the Petitions, Promises, and resolutions, of divers Shires? Wherefore, seeing these are blessings, and such as belong unto the godly, we may perswade our selves, that the Lord seeing the sincerity of their intentions, doth in much mercy shew his gratious acceptation of their zeale, for the good of our Church, King, and Common-wealth. I conclude this particular, if the Lord seeme to say to our grave, and gratioos Senators, as he said unto Joshua,Iosh. 1. 5, 6. There shall be none able to withstand you, because I will be with you, yea, I will not leave you, nor forsake you; therfore be strong, and of good courage: then let none who would be the Lords souldiers, and servants, desert the horsemen of Israel, and the Chariots thereof, yea the Lords Captains who fight his battels.

And thus by a serious consideration of these grounds, we may easily conjecture, yea abundantly satisfie our selves in this point, That the Parl. is not to be deserted, or forsaken by us. I proceed now unto the next Quære, which is,

Whether may the King be disobeyed,Quest. 5. and his commands withstood, or not? Whether He is to be opposed in his proceedings by any command of the Parl. Or whether are we now to obey King or Parliament.

Ans. 1.First, some Princes think, that they may lawfully do, whatsoever they have power to do, or can do; but the contrary seems truer (both by light of reason, religion, & I power intrusted by law in the hands of any) viz. that Princes have no power to do, but what is lawful, and sit to be done.

Ans. 2.Secondly, personall actions of superiours be disobeyed. The Gramarians say, Rex regis, à rego, the word King comes from Governing, because Kings are no other, but more high, and supreme Governours, and Magistrates. Now some hold (and I think warrantably) that if any Magistrate, or Judge, do pursue a man, not judicially, and by order of Law, but invade him by violence without any just cause against all law, that then in so doing he is to be held as a private person, and as such we may defend our selves against him. As for example, a woman may defend her selfe own body against an adulterer, though a Magistrate. A servant may hold his Masters hands, if he seek to kill wife, or children in his rage. Marriners, and Passengers may resist him who stands at helme, if they see that he would run the ship against a rock; yea they might hold the Princes hands, if being at the helme he misgoverns the ship, to their certain shipwrack, without prevention, because by his so governing thereof, He hazzards both his owne life, and theirs, and they by holding of his hands, prevent both his, and their own ruine, (which seems to be our present case) and therefore, much more may the whole Body defend it self against any such unjust and unlawfull invasion, as will indanger the safety, and welfare of all.

Ans. 3.Thirdly, the Kings personall, that is verball commands, without any stamp of his authority upon them, and against the order of both Houses of Parliament, I imagine may be disobeied. For I do conceive that no lawyer will say, that suppose the King should take the broad Seal of England from the Lord Keeper, into his own hands, that all the writs whatsoever he should issue forth signed with his own hand, and sealed therewith, ought to be obeyed: for it is not the stamp and impression of the Seale which makes a thing lawfull, but the Keeper thereof ought to be a Lawyer, and (by his place) should not for feare, or favour, signe any Writs, therewith, but such as are legall, and if he do otherwise, he is lyable to be questioned, and censured by a Parliament. And therefore doubtlesse, when Writs and Precepts are issued forth without the broad seal, or without a regall, that is, legall authority (as of all the Writs and Commissions, for executing the Commission of Array, are, as is proved both by the Parliament and others) they may be disobeyed, and withstood, especially when they are destructive to the Common-wealth.

Fourthly, Princes by Parliaments may be withstood,Answ. 4. when they desire, or endeavour those things, which tend to the envassailing of their people. Kings (we know) sometimes have loved their enemies more then their friends, and have marched forth amongst their enemies, to encounter with their friends. As for example, Richard 2. thought Spencer, and his confederates his best friends, though they were base sycophants, and bainefull foes, and conceited that his Peers (who were his loyallest Subjects) were the truest Traitors, And hence Princes being abused by the slattery of private persons (for some wicked ends of their own) have followed their private perverse counsels, before the grave, loyall and faithfull advice of their sage Senate. Now that it is lawfull for Parliaments to withstand Princes, who make unlawfull Warre upon their people, is so evidently proved, by the Author of that lately come forth, and learned and pious Treatise, called, A Soveraigne Antidote to prevent Civill Warres, Pag. 6, 7, 8, 9. &c. that at present I wholy silence it.

Fiftly, the matter with us is quite, and generally mistaken,Answ. 5. and the Question altogether wrong stated, viz. Whether we should obey the King, or Parliament? for the King and Parliament are not like two parallell lines, which can never meet, nor like two incompatible qualities which cannot be both in one subject, nor like the Atke and Dagon, whom one House will not hold, nor like God and Mammon, which one man cannot serve; for by siding with, and assisting of the Parliament, in those things which are according to Law, we side with, and serve the King.

Two things are here distinguishable, to wit,

1. In our obeying of the Parliament according to Law, we obey the King. This his Majesty grants, commands and commends, yea professeth, that he requires no obedience of us to himselfe, farther then he enjoynes that which is Law, lawfull and just, And,

2. In our obeying of the Parliament in this present Military and Martiall designe, we stand for the King, not against Him: that is, for the good of his soule, person, estate, honour and posterity; of which a word or two severally.

1. They stand for the Soule of their Soveraigne, who withstand him (having a lawfull call, and warrant thereunto) from doing those things which (if he doe) he can never justifie in the Court of Conscience, nor at the great chancery day of Judgement, but must sinke under the sentence of condemnation, for those unlawfull, and unjustifiable facts. And therefore the Parliament (and we in obedience unto Them) are friends unto the Soule of our dread Soveraigne, in not obeying, aiding and assisting of Him, to make unnaturall, unlawfull and unwarrantable Warres, upon his Parliament and people, which can never be defended, or justified, before or unto God, to whom the Mightiest, as well as the meanest, must give a strict account of all their actions at the last day. And

2. They stand for the Kings Person, who obey, joyne and side with the Parliament. His Majesties Person is now environed by those, who carry Him, (as far as the eye of humane probability can see) upon his own ruine, and the destruction of all his good people: which the Parliament seeing, they labour to free him from such false hands, by this twofold meanes, viz.

1. By perswading, beseeching and most humbly soliciting his Majesty to forsake them, and to rejoyce and make glad the hearts of his Parliament and People, by conjoyning himselfe with Them. But this request, sult and supplication will not yet be granted, though with much importunity and many loyall expressions desired. And

2. By labouring to take his evill Councellors from Him, they being confidently assured, and piously perswaded of the Kings sweet disposition and readinesse to comply with them, in any thing which might conduce to the good, either of Church or Common-wealth, if he were not overswayed and deluded by the fained flattering and crafty counsell of those about Him, who look with a sinister eye upon our State. Now this seemes to me to be all that is aimed at, in this present Military and Martiall designe: for the Parliament doe not purposely, and in their first intentions, intend by their Souldiers to cut off any (for if any be slaine by them, it is by accident) but to preserve and keep the peace of the Kingdome, to maintaine the priviledges of Parliament, the Lawes of the Land, the free course of Justice, the Protestant Religion, the Kings authority and Person in his royall dignity, and to attach, arrest and bring such as are accused, or imagined, to be the disturbers and firebrands of the Kingdome, unto a faire, just, equall and legall triall, which no man can think unlawfull in our Law-makers. And therfore both Senatours and Subjects in the prosecution of this Designe, stand for the safety of their Princes Person. And

3. They stand for his State, Wealth, Honour and reputation, for I conjoyne all these together. Kings acquire and accumilate more honour, respect, wealth and power, by their meeknesse towards, tender love of, and vigilant care for their Subjects, and their safety (as we see in Qa: Elizabeth and Tiberius, so long as he was such) then by tyrannizing over, and cruelly oppressing and handling of them, as we see in &illegible; If our gracious Soveraigne, would be but pleased, to consider the honour and prosperity which his predecessors have enjoyed, by following the Advice of their Parliaments, and the dishonour our Nation hath in divers designes received abroad, and the grievous troubles, vexation and discord we have had at home, since Parliaments have bene difused, and laid asleepe, he would then certainely see, that they seeke his wealth, honour, reputation and welfare, who desire to reconcile and conjoyne him unto his Parliament, and advise him to governe his people by Parliaments, and endeavour to free him from the power, and hands of those, who being themselves, desire likewise to make him, an enemy unto Parliaments. And

4. They stand for his Posterity: For as evill gotten goods slip and wast away, and seldome continue to the third generation: so Kings cannot be sure that their Posterity shall peaceably and successively enjoy their Crowns, except themselves rule and governe according to Law, righteousnesse only establishing the Crown and Throne, both upon Princes and their Posterity. And therfore they who assist not the King, in those things, wayes and courses, which are illegall, grievous, yea destructive to the Common-wealth, are His Childrens and Posterities best Friends.

I conclude this Question, with this Argument,

Those who labour with their lives and estates,Arg. to defend and maintaine the Kings Soule, Honour, Reputation, Wealth, Person and Posterity, obey and stand for Him.

But the Parliament,Quest. 6. and all those who side with them in this present designe, labour with their lives and estates, to maintaine and defend the Kings Soule, Honour, Reputation, Wealth, Person and Posterity.

Therefore the Parliament, and all those who side with them in this present designe, in so doing, obey and stand for Him.

It should seeme by what hath bene spoken, That neither Parliament nor People, doth intend the least indignity, dishonour or disloyalty to the King: and it is most perspicuously and clearely to be seene, in all the Kings gracious Messages and Declarations, That he hath no designe upon his people or Parliament, neither intends any harme, opposition or oppression unto them, but professeth to rule them according to Law and equity: How then comes it to passe, that either the Parliament will not or dare not confide in the King?

First, it is because they see that some about the King,Answ. 1. are potent with Him, who affect not the Parliament, nor their proceedings, have that influence in his counsels, and are so predominant and prevalent with Him, that they have often varied and altered him, from his words and promises. It is a Maxime in Law; The King can doe no wrong; for if any evill act be committed in matter of State, his Counsell, if in matters of Justice, his Judges must answer for it: and therefore I will not lay any fault upon the King, but rather impute the faults which have bene of late obvious to many, unto some about him, or in great favour with him. Great discouragements (I grant) the Parliament in their proceedings have had from the King, but I dare not imagine that they came originally and primarily from Him, but from some about him, in regard of that vast difference, which is between his words spoken to his Parliament, with his own mouth, when he was with them, and the Messages sent unto, and the heavy charges laid upon them, in his Letters and Declarations, now when he is absent from Them. He said once, That in the word of a King, and as He was a Gentleman, he would redresse the grievances of his people, as well out of the Parliament, as in it. Againe, That he was resolved to put himselfe freely and clearely upon the Love and affection of his English Subjects. Againe, We doe engage unto you solemnly the word of a King, that the security of all, and every one of You from violence, it, andever shall be as much our care, as the preservation of us and our children: And yet what actions and passages have of late fallen out, quite contrary to all these expressions? the Parliament and all who side with it, assist it, or obey it, in any of the Commissions or Orders thereof, being assaulted, opposed, yea now at last proclaimed Traitors. Againe, his Majesty doth professe the detestation of a Civill War, and abhorres (as he saith) the very apprehension of it. But this mind neither seemed to be in them, who came with his Majesty to the House of Commons, nor who accompanied him to Hampton-Court, and appeared in a warlike manner at Kingstone, nor in diverse of those who have bene with him and employed by him at Yorke, Hull, Leicester-sheire, Lancashiere, Sommerset-sheire, Northampton-sheire, and other places. And therefore we must needs conceive, that the King is put upon these courses and wayes by his evill Counsellors, and consequently, that the Parliament cannot confide in his words and promises, untill those Councellors be put from him, or forsaken by him. And

Answ. 2.Secondly, because of that trust which is reposed in them. I dare boldly say, That if the King should take, or make those Protestations, which he makes in his Messages and Declarations, unto any one of the Parliament-House, for the performance of any promise either unto them or theirs, which did simply and soly concerne themselves, they would beleeve and obey him, and without any further question confide in him, but they cannot doe this in the case, and place, wherein they are. The trust reposed by the people in the Parliament, is as well to preserve the Kingdome by making of new Lawes, when and where there shall be need, as by observing and putting the Lawes already made, in execution: And therefore in regard of this trust, they dare not hazard the safety, preservation, and sole managing of the Land to his Majesty alone, upon his bare word; because if after such confiding of theirs in the King, upon his faithfull promise unto them, he should be over-swayed, and seduced by some wicked Counsellours, to lay some illegall impositions, taxations and burdens upon his people (as he did soone after the granting of the Petition of Right unto the Subject) the Kingdome then would (and might justly) blame them as the Authours of their grievances, that had so lightly given away their liberties and freedome, by subjecting them to an arbitrary power. And indeed, if we will but consider it without passion and partiality, the case is no other but this, if the Parliament should wholy confide in the Kings words and Promises, then there were no more requisite in them, then this, to make a Declaration unto his Majesty of the grievances, burdens, annoyances and illegall proceedings in all, or such and such Courts or Persons, to the great oppression and heart-breake of the Subject, and having so done, to obtaine some serious Promise and Protestation, from the King to take-off all these pressures, and to be carefull for the future, that no such shall be imposed upon them, and then to confide in the King, and to breake-up the Parliament, and repaire every one to his own house. Now if Sense, Reason, Experience and Knowledge will tell us that this is farre from, or comes farre short of the true nature, and duty of a Parliament, then let us thinke that it is reason (as the case now stands) that the Parliament should not confide in the King. And

Thirdly,An. 3. because it were very dangerous for the time to come. Admitting our present Soveraigne were as prudent as Salomon, yea as pious as David (yea like him, a man after Gods own heart) yet it were dangerous for the Parliament so to confide in him, that they should trust the managing of all the great and weighty affairs of this Kingdome wholy and solely unto him, and consequently granting him an arbitrary power, to rule us, according to the dictates of his own conscience, or as the Lord should move and perswade his heart. This (I say) is not safe, because if they grant, give or settle this Power upon him, as King of England, then all other succeeding Kings will challenge and claime it as due; (or thinke they are not respected as their Predecessours) whence if any of them prove Tyrants or tyrannous oppressours, we shall be most miserable and wretched slaves.

Ob. Some perhaps may here object, that although Princes should not use their absolute power by doing alwayes what they lift, yet they ought not to be circumscribed, limited, or restrained in their Government, by any tie or obligation of Law.

An. 1. First, it is much better (considering the corruption of our nature) to be with-held by some restraints of Law and covenant, from that which is evill, and which we cannot justifie before God in the Court of Conscience, then to be boundlesse, lawlesse and left to live as we list, and to do whatsoever seems good in our own eyes.

An. 2. Secondly, this also is better for others: for as the Crane had better to keepe his head out of the Wolves mouth, then to put it into his mouth, and then stand at his mercy, whither he will bite off his neck or not, so it is better for every wise man, rather to keepe and preserve those immunities, freedomes, prerogatives, and priviledges, which God, and nature hath given unto him, for the preservation, prosperity and peace of his posterity, person and estate, then to disenfranchize himselfe and to relinquish and resigne all into the hands of another, and to give him power either to impoverish or enrich, either to kill him, or keepe him alive.

Quest. 7. I come now unto the last Question, which is this; suppose things come unto this height and issue, that the King will have the Parliament to confide in him for all they desire of him, or otherwise he will by warres labour to have his will of them, then whether is it lawfull for them by warre to withstand him? Briefly, whether is this Martiall and Military designe, undertaken by the Parliament, against that party which is owned and aided by the King, lawfull or unlawfull, and consequently whither may, and ought we to assist them or not?

An. 1. First in generall, I answer concerning meanes, by these Propositions; to wit,

  • 1.  Meanes must be used for preventing, and removing of all temporall evils.
  • 2.  The meanes to be used for the removall of temporall maladies must be alwayes lawfull: for we must never doe evill that good may come thereof.
  • 3.  The meanes to be used must be alwayes conformable, answerable and sutable to the malady; as for example, a man must not take a sword to quench a fire, nor thinke to defend himselfe against an armed foe, (who comes with his Sword drawn, or musket charged, or pistoll cocked to take away his precious life) with faire words; but must consider what remedy, or meanes is most proper for the preventing of the evill feared. Now there is no meanes better against offensive warres then definsive.

An. 2. Secondly, I answer in generall again, concerning Actions, by two Propositions, to wit,

1. That which is not lawfull for a private person to doe, is lawfull for a publicke; as for example, it is not lawfull for a private person to take away the life of one, whom he knowes to have robbed, or murdered some one or other, but it is lawfull for the Judge upon the Bench, upon good proof, to do it.

2. That which is not lawfull for a private person in his own particular cause, is lawfull for him in a publick: as for example, had Faux bin ready to have given fire to his train, when the Parliament had bin full, and in the very instant had fallen by a private mans Sword, that act had not bin punishable, but praise-worthy; but it is not lawfull for a private man to take away the life of one, because he sees, or knowes that he intends some mischiefe against his neighbour or acquaintance: but is bound only to indeavour to hinder, and prevent it, or, at least not to fall upon him, except he can by no other meanes prevent the death and preserve the life of his brother; and neither is this (I think) lawfull in all cases.

3. That which is not lawfull for a private and particular man to do upon his owne head, is lawfull for him to do being commanded by authority; as for example, if it be not lawfull for Sir John Hotham to shut the gates of Hull against the King, of his owne accord, yet it is lawfull being warranted, and commanded by the Parliament. If it be not lawfull for the Earls of Essex and Bedford, to take up arms to suppresse that party which oppresseth the Kingdome, of themselves, yet it is lawfull, by the Order and Commission of Parliament; as is proved by the soveraigne Antidote to appease our civill warres.

An. 3. Thirdly, if his Majesty passed an Act, not onely of Oblivion, but of Justification, to our Brethren of Scotland, for their Warres, or for taking up weapons against his instruments; then I cannot see wherein, or how our defensive Armes should so much differ from theirs, that they in so doing should be loyall Subjects, and we disloyall Traitours.

Answ. 4.Fourthly, a Necessary War must needs be lawfull; for the power and force of Necessity is such, that it justifieth actions otherwise unwarrantable. The transcendent χ&illegible;&illegible; of all politicks, or the Law Paramount, which gives Law to all humane Laws whatsoever, is Salus populi, The safety of the people: and this Supreame Law of Nations, Salus populi, hath it’s immediate rize from the Law of Nature, which teacheth every worme, much more a man, and most of all a whole Nation, to provide for its safety in time of necessity. It is not alwayes lawfull for us to kill those who stand at our doores, or who would keep us from comming out of our doores: but if our houses be blocked up, and we so hindred from commerce with others, or from seeking reliefe for the sustentation of our own lives, that we and ours are in danger to famish, it is lawfull then to issue forth with the forces we can make, to fight our selves free: how much more lawfull then is it to fight for the liberty and preservation of a Church and State? It seemes evident by the clearest beames of humane reason, and the strongest inclinations of nature, That every private person may defend himselfe, if unjustly assaulted, yea even against a Magistrate, or his own Father, when he hath no way to escape by flight: much more lawfull then is it for a whole Nation to defend themselves against such Assassinates, as labour to destroy them, though the King will not allow them defence. Let us consider the miseries, and heavy burthens which we must lye under, if we undertake not this defensive War, and that will shew us the Necessity thereof. Now the evills which we are in danger of, are of that nature, that if they should fall upon us (which the Lord in mercy forbid) we would thinke, that it were better for us to have no being, then such a miserable being. The present Case seemes to many, who see throwly into things, to be threefold. viz.

2. Whether Popery or Protestanisme? and this doubt arises from the Kings Assistants and Agents, in his designes, or some who are in neere trust, and of great power with his Majesty, who (for the most part) are either of no Religion, or of any Religion, or of the Popish Religion, or popishly inclined and effected. And

2. Whether slavery or liberty? and this doubt arises from the doctrines, counsels and perswasions of those about the King, who perswade Him that it is lawfull for him to doe what he list. And

3. Whether estates or none? and this doubt arises from some speeches fallen from some in place and authority; that all we have is the Kings; that when there is necessity he may command of, or take from us, what he please; and that he alone is the sole Judge of this necessity. The Case being thus with us, it seemes unnaturall, that any Nation should be bound to contribute its own inherent puissance meerely to abet tyranny, and support slavery: that is, to fight themselves slaves, or, to affoord aide, assistance and succour, either with persons or purses to those who desire and endeavour to introduce popery and heresie into their Church, and to bring themselves into such slavery and bondage, that they may tyrannize over them at pleasure. And thus the Necessity of this Warre shewes the lawfullnesse thereof.

Fiftly, Defensive Warres are alwayes held lawfull.Answ. 5. Now the nature and quality of our Warre is defensive, and so the more justifiable. For

1. The Kings Majesty mislead by Malignants, and malevolent Persons made preparations for Warre, before any such thing was thought upon by the Parliament. And

2. We intend not the hurt of others, but our own peace and preservation; the designe being but to suppresse riots, to keep the peace, and to bring Delinquents to a faire, just and legall tryall. And

3. Our Armes will be laid down, as soone as we are assured of a firme peace, and to be ruled as becommeth a free people, who are not borne slaves.

Sixtly, we may guesse at the nature of this Defensive Warre,An. 6. by divers particulars; as namely,

First, by the Persons against whom this Designe is undertaken, which is not the King (as was proved before, and shall be further enlarged by and by) but the Malignants of the Kingdome, which we labour to suppresse, and to bring to punishment in a legall way. We goe against the Troublers of Israel, the fire-brands of Hell, the Korahs, Balaams, &illegible; Rabshakaes, Hamans, Tobiahs and Sanballats of our time. And

Secondly, by the Persons most favouring, and furthering of this Defensive warre, who are in every place, those who stand most cordially affected to the good of the Common-wealth, and most sincerely addicted to the purity of the Church, and the intire profession and practise of Religion. And

Thirdly, by the mercy and favour of God towards the Parliament, the principall Agents and Authors of this Designe. If we consider,

1. How the Lord preserved their persons, from the malicious intentions of the Cavaliers, when they went to the very doore of the House. And,

2. How He discovered the plots and practises which were intended for the bringing up of the Army out of the North against Them. And

3. How He directed them in their setling of Hull, the Militia and Navy, when things were almost come to their height. And

4. How he hath from time to time, and still doth encourage them with, or by the Love, Loyalty, Fidelity, Faith and firme Resolutions of the most part of all Counties, to stand and fall, live and dye with them. And

5. How hitherto He hath extraordinarily turned all the plots of their enemies against themselves, and produced effects quite contrary to those they intended, and frustrated all their hopes.

If (I say) we consider these things, we cannot but say of the Parliament House, and Parliament-men, Surely God is in this place, and in the midst of you, and present with you, and president amongst you; and we considently hope, that the Lord will preserve and keep you, and finish the work he hath begun by you, to your comfort, His glory and our good. And

Fourthly, we may guesse at the goodnesse of the Designe, by the time, when it was undertaken; for it was not begun untill all other Meanes failed; and therfore may be called, ultimum & unicum remedium, the last and only meanes left. The old Rule was observed by them, Non recurrendum est ad extraordinaria, &illegible; qua fieri possunt por ordinaria, they tried all fair and ordinary means, and never had recourse to extraordinary and extreame courses, untill no other would prevail. We and They have again and again petitioned the King, but cannot prevail; and therfore all other politique means failing us, we ought generally (seeing the misery which is threatned is generall) to joyn heads, hearts, hands and estates together to fight for our King, Country, Parliament, selves, Religion, Laws, Liberties, lives and all that is ours, because now all is at stake. And

Lastly, we may cleerly see the lawfullnesse of this Defensive warre, if we but look upon the Causes and Ends therof, which are many, as namely,

  • 1.  The glory of God.
  • 2.  The good of the Church.
  • 3.  The propagation of the Gospell.
  • 4.  The peace of the Kingdome.
  • 5.  The prosperity of the Common-wealth.
  • 6.  The maintenance of the Kings honour, authority, and person, in his Royall dignity.
  • 7.  The liberties and immunities of the Commons.
  • 8.  The preservation of the representative Body of the Realme.
  • 9.  The Priviledges of Parliament.
  • 10.  The Lawes of the Land. And
  • 11.  The free course of Justice.

But I will reduce all these to foure Heads: to wit, Gods Glory, the Kings honour, the Parliaments safety, and the Kingdomes preservation.

First, This Defensive warre is undertaken by the Parliament for Gods Glory, and the maintenance of true Religion. Now we may, yea ought to sight, to maintaine the purity and substance of Religion, that it may neither be changed into the Ceremonions formalities of Popery nor our consciences brought into the subjection of Romish and Antichristian slavery.

Secondly, This Defensive warre is undertaken by the Parliament for the Kings honour and safety. Now we are bound by the duty of allegiance to defend and maintaine the Kings person, honour and estates and therefore,

1. It is our duty to labour by all lawfull meanes to free his Person from those Assassinates, who violently (by their wicked councell, assistance, and perswasion) carry him upon his owne danger and the destruction of his liege and most loyall Subjects. And

2. It is our duty to labour to maintaine the Kings honour; and therfore when he is over-ruled by those, who (through their subtilty) work so upon his mild and pliant temper, that they make him appeare to his Subiects, yea forraigne Nations to be a Defender of Delinquente and evill Counsellours, against his loving Subiects and loyall Parliament, which tends infinitely to his dishonour: it is then our duty to labour to unwinde and disentangle him from their practises, or by force plucke away their Persons from about Him. And

3. It is our duty to maintain his Maiesties estate. Now as the Lord Burleigh would often say to Q. Elizabeth, Madam, get but your Subiects hearts, and you need not feare their purses; so I may say, that the love and affection of the Kings Subjects (which his Parliament labours to enrich him withall, and to possesse him of) will be more advantagious unto him for matter of estate, then all the Prerogatives and Priviledges, which his obscure Counsellours perswade and indeavour so much for, against the will and welfare of his people. And if we compare our Q. Elizabeth (who would have nothing, but by and from the Parliament, with the love and affection of her people) with the king of Spain, who by an arbitrary power tyrannizeth over his Subjects, we shall then see, as cleare as the Sun, that where Princes by joyning with Parliaments, labour to unite, the hearts, and affections of their people unto them, there riches abound more, both with Prince and people, than in those Kingdomes where all cruell courses are taken by the King, to impoverish the Commons.

Thirdly, this Defensive warre is under-taken by us, at the Parliaments command, for their safety. Now both Reason and Religion will teach us, that if our pious Parliament and sage Senate, for the maintaining of our lives, liberties and lawes, and in, or for opposing of it selfe (not against the Kings Person, honour or estate, but) against his affections mislead by evill Counsellours, shall be exposed to danger, dissolution or death: then it is our duty by defensive Warre, to withstand that power, or force which is levied against them.

Fourthly, this Military Designe is undertaken for the Kingdoms preservation. Now both the Laws of God and man (as is against all contradiction proved in the Treatise, called, A Soveraigne Antidote to prevent and appease our civill Warres) will beare us out, for taking up Defensive Armes for the safety of our Kingdome and Common-wealth. That is, if we see indeavours and designes a-foot, for the reducing of the Government of this Kingdom, to the condition of those Countries, which are not governed by Parliament and established Laws, but by the will of the Prince and his Favourites; then it is lawfull for us to assist the representative body of the Land (whom we entrust with our laws and liberties) against those who resist and oppose them, that they may the more easily prevaile against, and make good their designes upon us.

And therefore although we will never cease to sue unto the King, and humbly to supplicate the King of Kings, for peace and unity, yet if we cannot obtain it, without the dishonour of God, the losse of our Religion, Priviledges, Liberties and Laws, the endangering, yea exposing of our most faithfull Parliament, to imminent perill, and the hazard of his Majesties Person, honour and estate; we may then with the peace of God, his holy Angels, and of our own consciences take up Arms for the Defense of all these.

FINIS

 


8.9. Richard Ward, The Anatomy of Warre (26 November, 1642)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Richard Ward, The Anatomy of Warre, Or, Warre with the wofull, fruits, and effects thereof, laid out to the life: VVherein from Scripture, and experience, these things are clearely handled; to wit,
1. What Warre is.
2. The grounds, and causes of Warre.
3. The things requisite in War.
4. The nature, and miseries of War, both Civill, and Forraigne.
5. What things are justly taxed in War.
6. When War is lawfull.
7. Whether it be lawfull for Christians to make War.
8. Whether Subjects may take up armes against their Soveraignes.
9. The remedies against War.
10. The Meanes to be freed from War.
11. The Remedies, and Meanes both Military, and Morall for the obtaining of Uictory in War.
By R. W. Minister of the Word at Stansteed Mount Fitchet in Essex.

Hoc & Ratio doctis, & Necessitas Barbaris, & Mos gentibus, & seris Natura ipsa praescripsit, ut omnem semper vim quacunque ope possent, à corpore, à capite, à vita sua propulsarent.
Cicero pro Milone.
LONDON, Printed for Iohn. Dalham, and Rich, Lownds.

Estimated date of publication

26 November, 1642.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 199; Thomason E. 128 (15.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

AS Children through ignorance of the nature, and perill of Fire often times fall thereinto, and are burnt: so Men not acquainted with the nature, and danger of Warre, too often desire it,a and too soone rush into it, to their own ruine. And therefore that we may see clearly, as in glasse, the true nature of this heavy plague of Warre, which now threatens our desolation, and the downfall of our Church and state, I have once againe stept upon the Stage, and for the good of my Country, exposed my selfe to the sight, and censure of all eyes and tongues. Omitting wholly what I have handled concerning Warre, both in my Pious &illegible; &illegible; Parliament time; and in The Principall duty of Parliament men; and in The Vindication of the Parliament, and their proceedings; I will here for the information of the judgment, the clearing of the understanding, and the satisfaction of the conscience of all those, who will peruse this Treatise, lay down many things, concerning both Warre in generall, and Civill Warre in particular; although for brevities sake I shall omitt many things concerning both, which might be said, and treat but briefly of those things which I do handle.

What Warre is.Warre in generall, is a lawfull defence, whereby the ordinary, and lawfull Magistrate, for just causes taking up Armes, doth publickely repell force with force, revengeth publicke, and generall injuries, or recovers generall, or generally sustained losses. In this Definition these things are observable. viz.

I. That Warre is not to be undertaken, but for just causes.

II. That it belongs onely unto the Magistrate to make Warre, and not to private persons

III. That it is not to be moved, but repelled: not kindled, but quenched: that is, rather for defence then offence: for the punishing of injuries, than the doing of wrong. All which showes evidently the lawfulnesse of the Parliaments Warres, their Cause being Religion, and the Republiques good; Themselves the greatest Magistrates, and of greatest power; and this designe of theirs declined as long as possibly they could, with the safety of the State.

The Causes of Warre.Q. 1. It may here be demanded, What the grounds, & causes of Warre are?

A. 1. First, in generall, the great Alexander being once demanded, why he endeavoured by Warre, to be Lord of the whole world, made answer; All the Warres that are raised in this world, are for one of these there Causes; viz. either to have many Gods, many Lawes, or many Kings: therefore I desire by Warr to possesse the world, and to command it, that all the inhabitants thereof may honour but one God, serve but one King, and observe but one Law.(b)

A. 2. Secondly, and more particularly, Warrs come sometimes from a good ground, or cause, sometimes from a bad bottome, or foundation.

First, sometimes War comes from good grounds, it being onely ordained to make men live in peace; whence Augustine(c) saith, That even amongst, yea by the true Worshipers of God, Warrs are often raised, and undertaken, not out of coveteousnesse, or cruelty, but out of a true, and sincere desire of setling peace. Yea hence the Emblematists devised this Hieroglyphicke to expresse this truth, viz,(d) a Helmet which had been used in War, being in time of peace neglected, and laid by, a swarme of Bees (emblemes of sweet peace) come and hire, build, and breed therein: the Motto or word was, ex bello pax. Peace is the off-spring of War, or War the Parent of Peace: much like unto the souldiers sword, which in Martiall was turned in the time of peace unto a Reapers siele.

Pax me certa ducis placidos curvavit in &illegible;:

Agricolæ nunc sum, militis ante fui.

Secondly, sometimes Warr comes from a bad bottome, or foundation, yea for the most part springs from one, or other of these evill rootes; to wit, either,

I. From some unbridled pleasures, and immoderate, and inordinate lusts.(e) Or

II. From diversity of Religion. For,

I. Sometimes Satan the father, and Prince of Heresy, stirs up Ware against the woman. And,

II. Antichrist, alwayes having an intestine hatred, and bitternesse of spirit, and mind against Christ, and his truth, instigates, and sets on work still some instruments or other, for the opposing, distracting, and dividing of those places, and persons who professe the Gospel. Or

III. From some coveteous desires, and affections. The fountaine, and originall of all Warrs, and seditions (saith Plutarch.:f:) are the corrupt coveteous desires of man, whereby, by hooke, and crook, right or wrong; he pursues after vehemently whatsoever he conceives, to be for his profit, and advantage. Whence Seneca(g) faith:

Si duo de nostris toll as pronomina rebus.

Praliacessarent, pax sine lite soret. That is,

Take from the world these Pronounes, Mine, and Thine,

The Warrs will cease, and peace through the world will seine.

IV. From ambition, or, a desire to rule:(h) It is observed by Entropius, and others, that the Romanes were 400, yeares in conquering of Jtaly, and that for the most part; they were ever in their Warrs Assailants, and but seldome times Defendants: and why so? but onely from their ambition to rule others, and to bring all into their subjection. Yea what but ambition, and a desire of supreame Soveraigery was the cause of all Alexanders, and the great Turkes Warrs?

V. Warrs alwayes, at least on one part, or in regard of one side comes from some sinne or other: according to that of Plutarch.(i) There is no Warr whereof some sinne, or vice is not the cause; viz, either pleasure, coveteousnesse, ambition, desire to rule, or the like.

VI. As Warrs come from some sinne or other of those who raise them, so they come from or for the sinnes of those against whom they are raised: for the sword is sent by God unto a people for their sinnes, and is therefore the punishment of sin. Yea sin is Causa sine qua non, such a cause of all Warrs, that no Nation should be annoied with any, if it were not for their sins.(k)

Qu. 2. Having thus cursorily run over the grounds or causes of Warr, in the next place we will consider Requisita, what, or how many things are requisite in Warr?

A. 1. I may answer hereunto, either as a Souldier, or as a Scholler.The things required in Ware.

First, if I should answer this as a Souldier, or as a Scholler in Mars his Schoole, then I might say, as Brasidæs was wont to say,(k) That these three things are requisite, and necessary in Ware: to wit,

I. To be willing to fight: for if a man hunt with unwilling hounds, he will scarrely ever catch the hare, and if a man fight against his will, he will hardly endeavour as he ought to overcome him, or them, with, or against whom he fights. And,

II. To feare disgrace, and shame: for if he be shamelesse, and fearelesse of disgrace, he will quickly flee, and forsake his colours. And,

III. To be obedient to Commanders; for if the souldier do not obey his Captaine, and Commanders, he will quickly be disranked; he may quickly be slaine, or taken by the enemy: and cannot performe any good service for him, under whom he fights.

A. 2. Secondly, if I should answer this as a Divine, or as a Scholler in Christs Schoole, then I must say, that these three things are required in every lawfull Ware, viz.

I. A lawfull Authority commanding it; for Warr must not be attempted without the Authority of the Magistrate.

II. A just, and lawfull end, or cause, occasioning, and moving it. Now what the lawfull Causes of Warre are and when Warre is lawfully undertaken followes by and by.

III. A good affection in following it, or a due consideration of the manner of the enterprising, and prosecuting of it: for although the cause of Warre be just, yet it must not be rashly set upon, but all other meanes must first be tried.(l)

The nature and noiseries of Warre.Qu. 3. It may now be enquired, What the Nature of Warre is?

A. 1. First, Warre is sometimes the whet-stone of fortitude, and the encourager, and stirrer up of youth unto Martiall discipline. When the King of the Lacedamonians did threaten, that he would utterly destroy and raze a certaine Citie, which had often annoyed the Lacedamonians, & found them work, the Ephori would not permit it, saying(m) Thou shalt not destroy, nor abolish the whet-stone of youth: calling thus that Citie which so often troubled them, the whet-stone of youth: because their young men thereby were whetted, and their affections set on edge to be skilfull in the art of Warre, seeing there were those so neare them, who would try both their skill, and strength upon every occasion, and advantage.

A. 2. Secondly, most commonly Warre is evill; whence the Scripture sometimes calls it, a grievous evill. Isa. 21. 15. sometimes an oppressing evill. Jerem. 46. 16. sometimes a bitter evill. 2. Sam. 2. 26. sometimes a devouring evill. 2. Sam. 2. 26. Ier. 50. 22. sometimes an evill which pierceth unto the heart, and soule. Ierem. 4. 10.

A. 3. Thirdly, Warre is of that nature that few are enriched thereby, as appeares thus; If any grow rich by Warre, then it is those who gather the spoiles thereof; but seldome these; therefore few or none. We say, Malè parta, malè dilahuntur; goods ill got wast like snow before the sun: as money wonne at playe, or got by theft. Yea lawfull prey, for pillage is seldome long enjoyed, according to our English Proverbe, Gightly come, Gightly go; or, to the Greek Adage &illegible; πολεμίας, I got this booty in the warrs from an enemie, and therefore I may spend it the more freely.

A. 4. Fourthly, Warre is the cause of all innovations, alterations, and mutations in a State, they being still brought in by the sword, or an overawing power. Whence Lucien saith, πήλεμ&illegible; &illegible;π&illegible;ν τν π&illegible;&illegible;ί, Warre is the father of all things, or the Author of all changes in States, and Kingdomes, from which all things seeme to proceed. Historians observe, that there is a vicissitude, and intercourse of all things, and that once in a 100 or at least in 400. yeares there is some great change, and alteration in all governments, and States, either in Religion, or manner of government, or Governours, which change whatsoever it is, seldome comes but by Warre. As for example, if ours or any Protestant Prince should desire to introduce, or set up Popery, it would very hardly be don but by the sword, and a strong power; Warre producing all innovations, and mutations in States.

A. 5. Fiftly, Warre is a miserable plague; whence this word Warre in the Hebrew tongue, hath its name from cutting, biting, and devouring, because warrs devoure, and consume many. Hence the sword is said to have a mouth, that is, an edge.(m) and to eat(n) that is, to kill. Warre is one of Gods 4. fierce, and devouring plagues:(o) yea one of his 3. forest judgments(p) and seemes to be the greatest of all the 3. or 4.(q)

Qu. 4. Some may here say, If Warre &illegible; of this nature, then what may we thinke thereof?

A. 1. First, we may safely thinke, that some Warre is lawfull; for (as Augustine saith,)r If Christianity should blame, or taxe all warrs, then when the souldiers asked Christ what they should do for the salvation of their soules, he would undoubtedly have bidden them to cast away their weapons, and to give over Warre, which he doth not but onely forbids them to wrong any, and bids them he content with their wages: which showes plainely, that some Warrs are lawfull, and therefore not all to be condemned.

A. 2. Secondly, we may thinke that the event of Warr is most uncertaine; and therefore they are much mistaken who expect from the Warrs nothing but good news, and prosperous successe in all designes, and enterprizes,(s) for he who puts on his armour must not bragge, as &illegible; that puts it off. Philip of Macedon warring upon the Grecians, Diogenes came into histent, and being conducted to the Emperour, and asked if he were a South-sayer, or Fortune-teller? answered(t) yes I am a true Fore-teller, and Fortune-teller of thy folly, and vanity, who (when none compells thee) comes to hazard thy life, and Kingdome, and to cast the dice of warr, whether thou shalt live or not, and whether thou shalt have a Kingdome at command, or to possesse or not. When 2. Armies are in the fields, we see both of them to have warlike weapons, and both to have humane bodies(u); and not the one of them to be armed, and the other naked, and the one mortall, but the other immortall; and therefore successe, event, and expectation, never deceive us, or frustrats our hope so much, in any thing as in Warr.

A. 3. Thirdly, we may thinke of Warr, that it is a thing not to be desired; and that none delights in the sound of the warlike Drums, or in the the Alarmes of Warr; but onely they who never tasted the bitternesse thereof(w) for he who hath once felt the smart of it, will tremble as oft as he thinks of its approach, or summons therunto. And therfore we must use all our best skill, and cunning alwayes to avoide warr as much as possibly we can,(x) it being a thing of that nature, that no wise man will desire it, nor willingly (when he can, and may avoide it) cast himselfe into Mars his armes, or expose himselfe to the mercy of his enemies sword, and his body, and life to perill, seeing it is not in our power to overcome or conquer, the issue of all warr being doubtfull, and hazardous.(y)

A.4. Fourthly, we may well thinke, that Warr is not so easily ended as begun; and that all should take notice of this who undertake Ware, that it is easily begun, but hardly ended, easy to enter into, but hard to get out of, (like a curious drawn Garden maze) the beginning and ending not being in the same mans power:(z) for every coward, or fresh water souldier may begin Ware, but it is laid aside, when the Conquerour will.(a)

A.5. Fiftly, we may thinke, that Warr is such a thing, that to be free from it, is a great blessing, and happinesse, and so pronounced to be by God. Isa. 2. 4. Mich. 4. 3. And therefore is never to be attempted, but upon immergent necessity.

A.6. Sixthly, we may thinke this of Ware to wit, That if peace may be procured, Warr is not to be Waged; as Marcian the Emperour was wont to say(b) Kings must not take up Armes against their subjects or any, so long as they may live quietly, and in peace.

A.7. Seventhly, we may thinke of Warr, that it ought not to be undertaken rashly, or unadvisedly, but with most mature deliberation; and that before we begin Ware, we should well consider what may happen in Ware(c) and not onely thinke with our selves, what power, and strength we have: but what the power of chance, or common sate of Ware is, or may be.(d)

A.8. Eightly, we may safely thinke of Ware, that it is evill, or a great judgment, or an evill, alwayes in some regard. The Æolians intending to ayd the Argives in their Warrs, Archidamus writ a letter unto them, wherein were onely these words, Quietnesse is good; and therefore if that be (as indeed it is) most true, then by the rule of contrarics it will follow, that War is evill. Yea Warr simply considered, and in it selfe, may be reckoned in the number of evills; that is, either.

I. Of evill of sinne, for it cannot be just on both sides. Or

II. Of evill of punishment; for it was ever held a scourge of God; and is onely therefore esteemed good, because we are bad.

Ninthly, we may think from the word of God that the war wherby whole Kingdomes are infested, wastest, and destroyed, comes not by chance, but by the purpose, permission, and providence of God, for the punishment of mens sinnes(a). And thus by these particulars we may ghesse at the nature of war, and see a little what we may think thereof: We will now briefly lay downe.

Quest. 5. What things are justly taxed in warre?

Ans. 1. An implacable desire of revenge, or to mischeeve those with, or against whom we fight: For although we may punish offences, yet we must not revenge our selves; and I conceive that in war we should bee more ready and inclinable to spare when wee can take, and with safety keep alive, than to kill; especially when the warre is undertaken for the punishment of Delinquents, because then if we keep them alive, they may fall by the sword of justice in the Magistrates hand, as well as by us in battell; and therefore they who have no mercy upon any in war are justly taxed.

2. Cruelty in revenging, and punishing in warre is justly taxed, for although a man may kill his enemy in battell, yet he should not delight in using cruelty towards him, by devising new or strange: orments to make him die.

3. Covetousnesse of prey and pillage is taxed in warre; for althoug it is not a sin to fight in war, yet to fight or war only for prey or pillage, is a crime(b).

4. Ambitious desires to rule, or possesse the Thrones and Crownes of others, are justly taxed in war. A Philosopher presenting Antigonus with a book, de justititia, concerning just and upright dealing between man and man, be said(c), Thou art a foole in graine oh Philosopher, who when thou seest me oppressing with war strange Cities, telst me of justice and upright dealing: Implying thus much, That they who for the enriching of themselves, or for the enlarging of their Territories, or for the glory of their Name, seek other mens Cities and Crownes, cannot observe the Lawes of righteousnesse. And therfore this ambitious desire is in war justly worthy of blame.

Quest. 6. I will now lance this plague soare of War, and touch it to the quick, in and by this quere: What the miseries of war are?

The miseries and miserable fruits and effects of war are many and great; as for example.

Answ. 1. In war the most wicked are held the most warlike, yea, except a man be exorbitantly wretched, he is scarce esteemed a resolute and right bred souldier; for as a plough-man except he be crooked and bending to his labour, doth never make cleare work, nor furrow his land handsomely, as the Jewes were wont to say; so except a souldier can sweare, swagger, ravish Maids, deflower Matrons, and play the villaine in graine, he is scarcely counted a man at armes in these corrupt times.

2. War continued, or long wars make men inhumane, for consuetudo peccandi tollit sen sum peccati, that is,

At first sinne seemes to us loathing, but often sinning makes sinne seeme nothing; reade and compare together, 2 King 8. 12. 13. with 10. 32. 33. where before Hazael ever truly entred into the wars, he thought he could never be so cruell, as to dash the childrens braines against the stones, as the Prophet foretold; but afterwards when he was inured with warre, he did it. And thus the continuall warres which the Siciliant had, made them like savage beasts, as Plutarch saith.

3. Warre brings populous Cities to utter destruction, and desolation(a); as we see by Fridericus Oenobarbus, who when he had overthrown Millain, sowed salt there, and harrowed it, to shew that that City was brought to utter destruction.

4. War brings misery, and desperate distractions upon, and unto that Kingdome were it is: For, as the Sea (though vast and great) is tossed and troubled when the winds strive and rage; so when Kings contend, and make war one upon another, their whole Kingdoms are disquited, perplext and vext(b).

5. War wasts that in an instant, which was long a finishing, and ruines in a trice what was long are edifying; for as Herestratus, an obscure and base man, could easily burn the Temple of Diana of the Ephesiant, which was 220 yeeres a building of all Asia, at the cost of many Kings, and beautified with the cunning labours of many excellent workmen; so it is most easie in war, by fire and sword quickly to subvert famous and admired Cities, as we see by Niniueh, Jerusalem and others, and shall see (we hope) by Rome. Wofull experience in poore Ireland shewes that warre wasts and consumes all wheresoever it comes, whether Townes, Cities, Villages, Corne-fields, Vine-yards, Forts, Orchards, and whatsoever is necessary for the sustentation of man.

6. Warre spares none, neither man, woman, nor child, neither young nor old: Virgins and Wives in warre are ravished and vitiated: Infants are trampled without pity or mercy under the horse feet, or tossed upon speares points: Women with child are often cut up and diffected.

7. War exposeth all things to prey, plundering and pillage. And

8. Caffeth, or carrieth those who are left unslaine into exile, captity, banishment, and bondage.

And thus I have briefly shewed the nature and misery of War in generall: I will now proceed to the consideration of Civill-war, wherein first we will take a view of the nature, then of the misery thereof.

Quest. 7. What is the nature of Civill war?

Answ. 1. It is a misery of miseries, for when wars arise in a Commonwealth, great calamities do invade that place, both publikely and privatly(c): war being like a swelling and overflowing streame and tide, which scatters, wasts, overturnes and beates down all things before it; much more Civill wars, wherein one part of the Land wars upon, or against another, as it is now in Ireland, and begun in England(d). In Civill wars nothing but misery can be expected, for if the worst part prevaile, their mercies are cruell, and if the better side get the better, yet it cannot be without much losse and blood-shed of the Inhabitants of the Land(e): And therefore Civill (or uncivill) wars is a misery of miseries.

Quest. 8. But may some say, What are the miseries of Civill war?

Many and great, as namely.

Answ. 1. Civill war is not easily appeased, nor quickly quieted, but once begun continues long; For as the wings of birds though clipt, doe speedily grow out againe, so the fire of Civill war once kindled, is not easily quenched, but although it be raked up for some time in the enibers of seeming reconciliation, yet upon every occasion it breaksforth againe.

2. Civill war is the wasting of the subject, and brings the Inhabitants of the land into a consumption: For as Dragons sucking the blood of Elephants, kill them, and they in like manner being drunk with their blood are squeesed in peeces by the fall of the Elephant, and so die; so oftentimes, yea for the most part in Civill war, both parts doe destroy and are destroyed, and both sides doe endammage and are endammaged(f).

3. Civill war exhausts the exchequer, or brings the Treasure or riches of the Land into an Hectique Fever, being like a vessell capt at both ends, which quickly runs out. This we see to our griefe both in Ireland and at home.

4. Civill war is the overthrow of all Estates and Monarchies, as appeares by the Roman Empire, and the &illegible; Monarchy of Alexander the Great.

5. Civill wars beget corruption of manners, and makes wicked men and deceivers grow daily, by much, worse and worse. And

6. It begetteth a change of Lawes, for as ex malis moribus bonæ leges, good Lawes come from evill customes and corrupt conversation, if the good side or party prevaile, but the enslaving and envassalling of the subject by a Law, if the worse win the Field.

7. Civil war exposes or layes a Land open unto the rage and fury of others, or invites forraigne Forces, and power to endeavour the conquering and subduing of them: For as the Eagle and Crane doe so vehemently contend and strive, that oftentimes clasping together in the aire they fall down unto the earth and are taken up alive of Shepherds; so now and then it commeth to passe, that whilst Princes perversly exercise mortall and deadly wars against their subjects, another invader when he finds him sufficiently weakned, puts in for a hand or lot, and carries all away; The Emblematists have observed this, and discribed it by a Lyon and wild Bore, who fight so long for victory or mastery, that at length they both become a prey unto the Vulture, who awaits them untill they have so weakned one another that they are unable to defend themselves; the word is, Ex damno alterius, alterius utilitas, The losse of the Inhabitants in Civill and uncivill wars is the gaine of forragn Invaders.

8. Civill war beget want of reverence towards God, for the madnesse and outrage thereof is such and so great, that it profanes and polutes every holy thing and place(g); neither times, places, nor persons, that is, neither the Lords day, nor his House, nor his Deputies the Magistrates, nor his Messengers the Ministers, being regarded by rude uncivill souldiers in Civill wars.

9. Civill war makes that King who undertakes unjust wars against his subjects to repent him of his victory, when he truly sees what hee hath done; and he overcomes in Civill wars wofully who repents him of his victory: and had therefore much better pardon his subjects if they doe offend him, then repent after Conquest the slaughter and destruction of them(h).

10. Civill war maketh many poore, according to that of Antisthenes, to whom one saying, That in wars the poore perish, answered(i); Nay, in war the poore are multiplied, many being impoverished thereby, as we finde it true both in this Land and in Ireland.

11. Civill war brings good and bad into misery, or the sword of civill warre wounds, yea murders both the innocent and guilty: for when the fire or flame thereof breaks forth in a Land, both guilty and guiltlesse, both wicked and righteous, feele equally the smart, and misery thereof;(j) neither love nor hatred being knowne by any externall thing.(k) And thus by these particulars we may easily ghesse at the Nature and Misery of civill warres.

Quest. 9. It may in the next place be demanded, when warre is lawfull? or, seeing that sometimes it is lawfull to fight, and sometimes not, how may we know when, with the peace of a good conscience, we may wage warre, or aid and assist these who fight?

Answ. 1. War is lawfull when it is for Religion, and the Republicks good. When Pope Eugenius offred to bestow some Cities upon Alphonsus, because he had recovered Piconum, and subjected it to the Sea of Rome, he answered, That he neither fought for profit nor prey, but only for Religion and the Churches cause.(l) And

2. When it is to procure the continuance and setling of peace and quietnesse. Men prepare war, when they desire peace, because (as we say in a proverb) weapons bode peace,(m) yea wars are undertaken that men may live in peace without injury and oppression.(n) And as men sustaine and endure hard labour upon hope of rest and case, so wise men make warre in hope, and for the effecting of tranquility and peace.(o) Indeed men doe not desire peace, that war may follow, but make war that peace may be obtained: Let those therefore who wage war with or against any, be peace-makers in their warring; that is, by labouring to overcome those against whom they fight and contend, that so they may bring them to embrace the sweet and profitable conditions of peace(p). In war, we say, the end must be good, which end in generall is Gods glory, in speciall the conservation of justice, and confirmation of peace: Pugna pacis mater, war is the mother of peace.

3. War is lawfull when it is for the defence of a mans owne right, or for the safety, safeguard, and preservation of our Cities, and habitations(q): For reason teacheth the learned, necessity the rude, custome the Gentiles, and nature the wilde beasts, to repay war with war, and force by force, when they are robbed and deprived of their right by injustice and oppression(r).

4. War is lawfull when it is to repulse our enimies: Moses(s) said to Ioshua, chuse us out men, and goe fight: upon which words Piscator observes, that it is lawfull for the people of God to defend themselves with weapons against their enimies; for Moses doth here nothing of himselfe, but by Gods direction. And

5. When it is deliberately begun, and speedily ended: undertaken with good advice, and given over with all willingnesse, when it may with safety, conveniency, and the good of Church and State. And

6. When it is in defence of the innocent: for that war whereby either our Countrey is defended from invaders, or the weak and innocent from oppression, or our friends from theeves and wicked persons, is a most just war(a). Or when war is attempted and enterprized to deliver the oppressed, and to bridle the insolency and cruelty of the wicked(b).

7. War is lawfull when it is for the punishment of publick injuries and wrongs; for just wars were wont to be thus defined, contentions whereby we endeavour to punish publick injuries and wrongs(c); and therefore that war was not only of old held just, but also necessary, which defended force by force.(d) And

8. When it is for Gods people, it is lawfull, 2 Sam. 10. 12. And

9. When the cause is iust, and weighty, not light and frivolous; &illegible; &illegible;ε σε&illegible;ς &illegible;&illegible;. vel de lana caprina, as about the shadow of an Asse, or, the fleece of a Goat, as the Proverbs are: that is, for trifles, and things of no value: but as Suetonius said to, and of Augustus, Quod nulli genti sine justis & necessariis causis bellum intulit, that he never made war with any Nation without just and necessary causes.(e) And

10. When it is undertaken by lawfull authority, to wit, of the Magistrate as was shewed before. And

11. When it is only against those who injure us, or raise uniust war against us, or our Countrey. Note here, that our Countrey, or Kingdom may be injured by an enimy two manner of wayes, to wit:

First, When he invades, by unjust forces, our temporall possessions and good things, labouring by a strong hand to deprive us of them, whether it be our liberties, lawes, lives, riches, inheritances, wives, children, &c. Now against such as these we have just cause to defend our selves.(f) And

Secondly, When he labours to rob and spoile us of our spirituall and eternall treasure and riches, viz. the true worship of God, the true, pure, and holy Religion; and consequently the salvation of our soules.(g)

12. War is lawfull when it is carried in a good manner: for although God himselfe hath taught Stratagems in war, and consequently allowes them; yet lawfull Covenants and Faith given must bee kept inviolable.

13. When Malefactors, Malignants, and Delinquents are maintained, and protected, as Iudg. 20.

14. When Rebellion is moved, or raised in a Land, and defensive armes are prepared for the preservation of the State, as David waged war against Sheba, 2 Sam. 20.

15. When it is against Apostates, and back-sliders in Religion, Deut. 13. 12. &c. Lyran in Numb. 31.

16. When it is better than peace; for(h) an honest war is to be preferred before a base and shamefull peace.

17. When it is enterprized by the speciall commandment of God, as Saul was sent against Amaleck.

18. When it is for the rescuing and recovering of such things as are unlawfully taken away, 1 Sam. 30.

19. When it is incruentum bellum, an unbloody warre; or as Laertius saith, δας πόλεμος, a warre without weeping; that is, when the victory is got without blood-shed, and murder.

20. When it is for the preservation of liberty, and prevention of slavery and bondage. When time and necessity requires (saith Tully) we must fight, because death is to be preferred before base slavery and servitude, and a man had better die in the wars, than live in disgrace and bondage.(i)

Lastly, War is lawfull, when there is no other meanes left; for that warre is lawfull which is necessary, and those armes are just and warrantable, which are not taken up untill there is no hope at all of peace or safety, but by warre.(k) And hence the Jewes in all their voluntary wars, first offered peace unto their enimies, and then denounced warre; but did not execute it untill first they had made this threesold Proclamation, viz.(l)

  • 1He that will have peace, let him have peace.
  • 2He that will flee, let him flee.
  • 3He that will make war, let him make war.

This we must alwayes remember in warre, that though both the cause be just, and the authority sufficient; yet must it not be rashly or hastily undertaken,(m) for no man trieth extremities at the first. Warre is one of the sharpest remedies to cure the maladies of a Common-wealth, and the event thereof is both doubtfull and dangerous; and therefore it should bee the last refuge, and only then used when necessity enforceth.

Quest. 10. Although it be not much doubted or questioned, whether the Jews or Gentiles of old did lawfully, as occasion served them, make warre, yet it is ordinarily enquired, whether it be lawfull for Christians, now under the Gospel, to make war or not?

Answ. It is, as is proved by these grounds, viz.

1. God, by Moses prescribes a forme of making warre, Deut. 20. 1. and therefore certainly he did allow his people sometimes, and upon some occasions to make warre.(n)

2. We read that many of Gods faithfull servants have made warre, as Abraham Gen. 14. 28. Moses, Exod. 17. 8. Ioshua, Exod. 17. 9. Iosh. 1. 14. and 12. 7. the Judges, 1. 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. 11. chapters, the Kings, David, Asa, Iosaphat, Hezekiah.

3. Iohn Baptist forbids not souldiers to fight, neither commands them to give over warre, if they would be saved; but to wrong none, and be content with their wages, Luke 3. 14.

4. The Magistrate is said, Rom. 13. 4. not to beare the sword in vaine, but to bee the Minister of God for our good, and a revenger to execute wrath upon him who doth evill. Which plainly shews, that the right of the sword is allowed both against private faults and offenders, and also against publick, who by armes are to be resisted and opposed.

5. Cornelius the Centurion, Acts 10. 1. is commended for his faith, and did not give over warfare (that we read of) when he was baptized: which undoubtedly the Apostles would not have suffered if war had been prohibited unto Christians. And so Math 8. 10. the saith of another Centurion is highly commended.

Rom. 13. 4.6. It is most certain, that a great part of the Magistrates duty is, to protect and defend innocents, orphans, widdowes, and those that are oppressed, which sometimes without Armes cannot be done. And therfore if the case require it, the godly Magistrate may flee unto this last remedy of war. It is the office of the Magistrate, to take vengeance on him that doth evill: Now it may fall out that not one or two, or a few, but a multitude may do evill, and commit some outrage, who cannot be resisted but by force of armes; and then the Magistrate is to use this meanes of the sword for the suppression of evill, and the vengeance of evill doers.

7. That which God perswades unto, and which is done by the inspiration and assistance of his holy Spirit, is lawfull; but God often perswades and exhorts the Saints to make warre, and is said to be present with them by his spirit, and to give victory unto them; and therefore warre is lawfull, Iosh. 1. Iudg. 6. 11. and 13. chapters, 1 Sam. 15. and 30. chapters, Psal. 44.

8. That which the Saints doe by faith is lawfull unto them, but by faith they make warte, Heb. 11. 34. therefore warre is lawfull unto them.

9. The Scripture saith, There is a time to war, and a time to make peace, Ecclesiast. 3. 8. And therefore warre is lawfull.

10. God is stiled, The Lord of Hoasts, a man of war; One who teacheth our hands to warre, and who giveth victory in battell, and therefore warre is lawfull.

Quest. 11. But whether is it lawfull for Subjects to take up armes against their Soveraigne?

Answ. Dr. Sharp (Symphon. Proph. & Apost. pag. 244.) answers hereunto, that there are two sorts of Subjects, to wit.

1. Some who are meerely private, and these ought not of themselves to take up armes against their King.

2. Some who are so private, that the superior power in some sort doth depend upon them, as the Tribunes amongst the Romans; the Ephori amongst the Lacedemonians; and our Parliaments amongst us: And if Princes observed not their Covenants and promises, these might reduce them, and if they sought the overthrow of the State, these might withstand them.

Quest. 12. What are the Remedies against warre, that is, both for the preventing and removall of it?

Answ. 1. The Remedies are either Morall, Martiall, or Theologicall.

First, the Morall meanes are these two, to wit:

1. Humble sutes and supplications for peace, unto them from whom a warre is feared.

2. Expressions of the Loyalty of our actions, and sincerity of our intentions and desires, however they may be wrested or misconstrued.

Secondly, The Military meanes are many, as namely,

1. To follow close a victory: this was Hanibals fault, who could tell better how to winne the field, than how to use his victory: and this Casar blamed in Pompey, that having once the better of him, he did not follow his fortune.

2. To give way to a storme. Pleu andet andax quam fortis, a foolehardy man dare doe more than one truly magnanimous; for the property of a good souldier is not to runne himselfe into such desperate hazards, that there is no probability for him to come off with safety; but couragiously to adventure upon any feazible designe, and to give it over, when it may bee given over, but cannot bee effected or brought to passe. It is better (as all know and will confesse) for souldiers sometimes to retreat, that they may returne againe to their greater advantage, than to keep their stations and die. Whence Antigonus once forced to give way to the violent onset of his enemies, said,(o) That he did not flie, but pursue his profit and advantage, which was placed backwards, or behinde him; intimating, that in such a case it was more commodious for him to goe backwards than forwards, to retire than to advance.

3. Another Military meanes for the removall of warres is Prudence, Magnanimity, and skill in Martiall discipline, in the Captaines, Commanders, and Officers.

4. Another is, for Captaines and Commanders to observe, and mark diligently all conveniences and advantages of time, place, &c. both for pitching their tents, and fighting their battells.

5. Another is, in the souldiers strength, courage, resolution, and obedience to their Commanders.

6. Another is, for Captaines and souldiers in necessity, when they can, to help one another.

7. Another is, for Captaines and Common Souldiers to bee well armed, for and against all assayes, and assaults: But more amply of these by and by in the way unto Victory.

Thirdly, the Theologicall or Religious Remedies or Means for the preventing and removing of Warre, are these which follow, and the like, viz.

1. To warre upon our selves; The Oracle of Apollo answered those of Cyrrha, That if they would live in peace at home, they should make war with their neighbours abroad; but if we desire peace with others, we must wage continuall war with our selves, and our own sins, wickednesse within, being the true cause of war without.

2. To humble our selves before and unto God, by fasting, Joel 2. & 3. Jonah 3.

3. To enter into a covenant and holy league with God, Hose 2. 18.

4. Seriously to repent and to turne truly unto God, Levit. 26. 40 &c. Devt. 30. 1. and 32. 36. and 1 Sam. 7. 3. Jer. 4. 8. and 6. 26.

5. A promise of thankfulnesse or thanksgiving unto the Lord, if he will be pleased to give victory unto us or preserve and deliver us from warre, and the performance of this promise when he hath answered our desires.

6. Prayer unto God, and that both in generall and particular.

First, in generall we must pray that the Lord would be our Captain in the time of War, and take our part and fight for us, there being nothing without him which will or can help us, that is, neither

1. Strong, and well instructed Armies, Psal. 33. 16. Nor

2. Fenced Cities, Amos 5. 9. Nor

3. Great or mighty colleagues or confederates, Psal. 60. 13. and 62. 10. And therefore let us not trust in any of these or the like, but only in the Lord, as these his Saints have done, to wit, Asa(p), Iosaphet(q), David(r), Isa(s) Hezekiah(t).

Secondly, Because the Lord works ordinarily by meanes, therefore we must in speciall and more particularly pray when we are anoid and infested with war.

1. That the Lord would bestow upon our Captaines, Commanders, and Officers, such wisedome, and prudence, yea such fortitude and courage, that they may consult of, manage, and order all things wisely and discreetly, and prosecute, yea execute all things prosperously, magnanimously, and with good successe, Psal. 20. 1. 5.

2. That the Lord would encline the hearts of the souldiers unto obedience, and subjection to their Captaines; and preserve them from all sedition and rising up against their Commanders

3. That the Lord would preserve both Commanders and Common Souldiers from all wickednesse and impiety, especially from those hainous offences which too frequently follow the Camp and accompany wars; as namely, blasphemy, fornication, rapes, drunkennesse, gaming, jarres, contentions, theft, pilsering, &c.

4. That the Lord would strengthen the hands of all in battell, giving them courageous hearts, resolute minds, and firme resolutions, that their battels and endeavours may be crowned with victory.

Now that these our prayers may become effectuall, two things are required, viz.

First, They must proceed from a pure mind, or an heart purged from sinne(u).

Secondly, They must proceed from faith unfained, or from a firme confidence and assurance, that the Lord will heare our prayers in as much as may stand with his glory and our good(x).

And thus much for the Remedies against, or Meanes for removall of this plague of war from us.

Quest. 13. It may now in the last place be demanded, How victory may be obtained in War? Or by what means we may not only be preserved from the power of our enemies in battell, but also bring them by conquest and victory into subjection?

First, The Martiall meanes for the obtaining of victory in war, are either Negative, or Affirmative.

1. Negative, if souldiers desire conquest in fight, Then

1. They must not fall to pillaging too soone, lest their enemies take occasion thereby to fall upon them, and to take them unprovided.

2. They must not pursue their enemies in flight so eagerly, that they mingle themselves with them or run themselves so far in amongst them, that they are not able to bring themselves off againe with safety.

3. They must not at all trust to their multitude; for not alwayes that Army which is the greatest prevailes, but oftentimes the least. Darius against Alexander, Pompey against Cæsar, Hamball against Scipio, Antonius against Augustus, and Mithridates against Sylla, had greater Forces without comparison then their enemies, and yet were overcome.

4. They must not at all trust in their own strength: Thou hast therefore oh man (saith Augustine(a) not overcome in battell, because thou presumedst of thy selfe; for he who before fight, trusts in his own strength, shall be overthrown(b).

Secondly, There are Affirmative martiall meanes for the obtaining of Victory in War; as namely.

1. For Captaines highly to prize their souldiers, Fabius Maximus sent to Rome to the Senate for money, to redeeme his souldiers which Haniball had taken Prisoners, and being denied thereof, commanded his sonne to sell all his lands, and bring money for their ransome; so highly did he value and esteeme the freedome of his men. And thus every Captaine should doe if he would winne the love and affection of his souldiers, without which a Commander should hardly obtaine victory.

2. Courage and resolution in battell: 300 Noble-men of the house of the Fabii, tooke upon them alone to wage battell against the Vientines(c). To shew that a true and magnanimous souldier will not fear to undertake any noble feazible enterprize for the obtaining of Victory in the day of battell.

3. Long preparation for the undertaking thereof: Hee must long prepare for warre who would speedily overcome, because a long preparation of war makes a speedy victory(d).

4. To prosecute the wars with good counsell and advice; for there must be counsell at home when there is warre abroad(e).

5. A diligent observation of all conveniences and inconveniences which may happen, whether of Sun, winde, mists, &c. for the Sun and dust hinders our sight, and the winde being contrary, or in our face, is noxious both to horse, rider, and all kinds of darts, arrows, and shot.(a)

6. The use and assistance of expert and experienced souldiers, who know their termes of art, postures, conveniences, inconveniences, when to advance, when to fall off; and how to use their weapons, or handle their armes &c. One saying on a time to Epaminondas, that the Athenians were all armed with new armes and weapons, answered, What then? shall Antigenidas (who was a most curious Musitiam) weepe, because Tellia (who was a most poore player of instruments) hath got a new Pipe? signifying, that the Athenians were to small purpose armed with new weapons, seeing they knew not how to use them.(b) If an Army consist of raw, yong, and fresh-water souldiers, who seldome or never saw men wounded or slaine; when they come to see such sights, they will tremble and be confounded with feare, and begin to think rather of flying than fighting.(c) Experience shewes, that knowledge and skill in Military and Martiall discipline doth exceedingly embolden a souldier in battell; and that in warlike enterprizes, a few ancient and expert Warriours hath overcome, got the day, put to flight, yea to a fore slaughter, a great multitude of rude ignorant, untaught and untutered souldiers(d).

7. Subtilty, Policy, and secret stratagems: Note here, That Policy in war, is threefold, to wit,

1. For the immediate endangering of the enemy: It is observed That Haniball never sought any battell without laying some ambush for the ensnaring of his enemies: And when just war is taken in hand, it matters not whether a man endeavour to conquer, subdue, and master his Adversaries by open force or secret politike devices: for the Lord commanded Ioshua by deceit, or a secret stratagem, to overcome the Inhabitants of Ai(e). Good Captaine, doe not alwayes Vi & armis, by open force labour the overthrow of their foes, but chiefly endeavour it by secret stratagems, because in open warre there is a common danger, but in warlike devices those who lie in wait are not in such perill, as these are for whom they lie in walt(f). Antigonus being asked, How a man should give the onset upon his enemy? answered, either by force or frand, either openly or by deceit(g).

2. Policy in war is sometimes for the immediate preservation of themselves, and mediate or consequent disadvantage of their foes: P. &illegible; to avoid the Sunne that shined in the face of his Hoast, was so long in ranging his Army, that by the time the battells should joyne, the Sunne was upon his back. The like policy used Marius against the Cymbrians, and Augustus against the Flemings.

3. Policy in warre is sometimes for the encouraging of the souldiers against their enemies: Polemon to make his souldiers fiercer in assailing the Lacedemonians, cast his colours into the midst of his enemies, whereupon they pressed upon them with great violence, esteeming it a great shame to abandon their Ancient, or to have their enemies possesse their Ensigne.

8. Another martiall meanes for the obtaining of Victory, is the Captaines encouraging of his souldiers and convincing them of the lawfulnesse of the war in hand. Themistocles leading out the Army of the Athenians against their enemies, saw two Cocks fighting most fiercely; whereupon, hee turned him to his Souldiers, with these words(h): These neither fight for their Countrey, nor for their Religion, nor for their Possessions, nor for their fathers Sepulchers, nor for honor, nor for their wives & children, nor for their Lawes, or Liberties, but only, Left the one should be overcome of the other, and forced to yeeld unto him: How much more then should we hazzard and adventure our lives when we fight for all these? with which words his souldiers were so encouraged, that they went most courageously and resolutely against their Adversaries.

9. Another meanesis, experienced Commanders and stout Captains; Cæbriat the Athenian was wont to say(i): That an Army of Deere was more terrible if they had but a Lyon to be their Captaine, than an Army of Lyons having an Hart to be their Captaine.

10. Another meanes is, to cope with the enemy, before his strength encrease too much; whence Iulius Cæsar was wont to say,(k) That it was a great madnesse for any to stay untill the Hoast or their enemy was encreased and multiplied; because he who desires to conquer and subdue his foe, may in all probability sooner doe it when his Army is small, than when it is great, when he hath few to aid him, than when he hath many.

11. Another meanes is, to be resolute, and couragious in battell. There is a people in Germany called Catti, whose strength consisteth in their foot-men; of whom it is said,(l) Others goe to skirmish, and the Catti to warre; such was their courage, magnanimity and undaunted resolution in the day of battell: much like to that speech of King Iames, That he had foure and twenty Players, and six Actors. Souldiers must not be like the Frenchmen, of whom it is said,(m) That if they loose the first encounter, they loose also the victory; but rather like the Lacedemonians, who of all people were most valiant, being both in the beginning and end of the battell more than men.

12. Another meanes is, to aime principally at the principall, and to levell at the Leaders, (as Scanderbeg was alwayes observed to doe) because, smite the sheepherd, and the sheep will be scattered. Epaminondas viewing a huge and well harnessed Army, but without a Leader, Generall, or Captain, said,(n) How great and faire a beast is here, but without an head.

13. Another meanes is, to warre only upon just causes. It is observed, That the Emperour Trajane was never overcome, or vanquished in warre, because he never undertook warre without just cause, as Hely the Spartan doth say. The Romans were never so foiled, neither ever received so much dishonour in all their warres in Asia, or Africa, as they received at the siege of Numantia; and this was not for default of battery or assault, or because the City was impregnable, but because their warres against Numantia were unjust, and the Numantines had just cause to defend themselves. Titus Livius observes, that Marcus Marcellus would not be Captaine of that warre, which was not very well justified; and that Quintus Fabius would never undertake that warre in chiefe, which was not very dangerous; and that these two Noble Princes were of high esteeme with the Romans: But in the end much more was the estimation of Marcus Marcellus for being just, than of Quintus Fabius for being valiant. Whence it hath beene said(o) That if the cause of the Warriour be good, the end of the warre cannot be evill; and contrarily the end of a fight is not judged to be good, except a good cause and a right intention did precede the fight.

These and the like, are the Military and Martiall Meanes which are to be used for the obtaining of Victory in Warre.

Object. Against these it may be objected, that victory in warre comes only from God; and therefore all Military meanes are vaine, none being able to preserve us from warre.

Answ. To neglect the meanes wholly, is to tempt Gods Providence, and to trust in the meanes, is to distrust Gods Providence; and therefore we must observe, how meanes profit, and how not, viz.

1. Military meanes will help us, as they are meanes ordained by God, for the removall of the malady of warre, if we use them in the feare of the Lord, and because ordained by God, putting our trust, confidence, and affiance for our protection and preservation wholly in Him, notwithstanding the use of the meanes

2. These meanes will not help us, if God being despised, neglected, and not looked at as all in the use of them; wee being intent only upon them, or at least respect them primarily, hoping that they will profit us without God: for victory in war is neither got by multitude, nor strength, but by the ayd, assistance, and power of God(p). And therfore these military meanes must now be used, and those Theologicall, mentioned in the 12 question, and then trust solely, wholly, and onely to our good and gracious God, who is the God of victory, and maketh wars to cease in the world: and to whom all praise and glory belongs both for the enjoyment of all good, and preservation from all evill, whether of sinne, or punishment.

FINIS.

Endnotes

 [a ] Duke bellum inexpertis.

 [b ] Guevara samilier. epist pag. 240.

 [c ] Qua non crudelitate, aut cupiditute, sed pacis studio geruntur, Aug in libr de Verb. &illegible;

 [d ] Andr. &illegible; emblem. Pag. 445.

 [e ] Iam. 4, 1.

 [f ] &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; & &illegible; &illegible; &c. Plutar consol. &illegible; &illegible;

 [g ] &illegible; 4. Piou.

 [h ] Genes. 14, 3.

 [i ] Nullum &illegible; bellum, cujus virium aliquod to sit causa, &c Plut. de repugn. Stoir.

 [k ] Livit. 26, 24, 25: Deut. 28, 36, 49 Iud: 2, 13, & 3, 1, 8, & 4, 1, & 6, 1, & 10, 6, & 13, 1, & 1, King 8, 33, Jsa. 5, 25, Ier. 5, 15.

 [k ] &illegible; 52 &illegible; ferm 52.

 [l ] Iudg. 10. 13. 2 King. 18. 14.

 [m ] Nequaquam abolobis, neque subveries juvenum cotem. Plutar. in Lacon. Brusolth. 3. 6. 15.

 [m ] Iob. 1, 15, Hebr. 11, 34.

 [n ] 2, Sam. 11, 25.

 [o ] Ezech. 14. 21.

 [p ] 2, Sam. 24, 13, 14.

 [q ] Levit. 26, 16, 17, 25, 33, Deut. 28, 48, &c.

 [r ] Si Christiana disciplina omnia bella culpares, &c Aug. &illegible; de centur.

 [s ] &illegible; qui in bello &illegible; &illegible; rerum &illegible; expectant, Iul. Cæs. Comm. &illegible; 7.

 [t ] &illegible; vanitatisq, tuæ &illegible; &illegible; specutator, &c.

 [u ] Virinque serrum, & cerpora humana crunt: nusquam &illegible; quam in &illegible; eventus respondent, Lev. lib. 3. &illegible; Duke &illegible; non expertis, at quigustauit, cotremiscit &illegible; quoties &illegible; illud videt. pindar &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;

 [w ] Duke &illegible; non expertis, at quigustauit, cotremiscit &illegible; quoties &illegible; illud videt. pindar &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;

 [x ] &illegible; &illegible; prudenter derliuanda, G. eg. in nor

 [y ] Sapientis non est velle certare, & periculose velle committere &c. Lactaut. l. 6.

 [z ] Scito omne bellum &illegible; sacile, cæterum ægerrimè disincre, &c. Salust, in Ingurth.

 [a ] Bellum &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; sicet. deponitur cum victores velint, Tull. in quæst.

 [b ] Imperatori ar, ma non essceaplenda, dum pacẽ habere liceret, Zo. naras to. 3. &illegible;

 [c ] &illegible; evenire in &illegible; potest, priusquam ingrediare considera, &illegible; &illegible;

 [d ] cum tuæe vires, &illegible; imfortunæ, Martemque belli communem propone animo, Liv. lib. 30.

 [(a) ] &illegible; 26. 17. &illegible; 31. &c. 2 Sam. 17. 24. 12. 13. Psal. 46. 9, 10.

 [(b) ] Militare non est delictuns, sed prepter prædam militare, peccatum est. Ambros.

 [(c) ] Despis, qui cum me videas alienas ubes armis vexantem, tamen apud me de justitia dicetis. Erasæ. lib. 4. Apoph. ex &illegible;

 [(a) ] terem. 48. 2. Hose. 5. 8. 9.

 [(b) ] Quemadmo dem certantibus &illegible; mare concuritut, &illegible; Reg bus sibi adversantibus, populus &illegible; vexacur. Cheysost in Matth.

 [(c) ] Cum &illegible; et publice & privarim magnæ urbem calamitates invadunt Plato lib. 1. de l. ge.

 [(d) ] &illegible; torrenen infiat omnia sternir, & vastat. Plut. de educat. puer.

 [(e) ] Omnia in bellis civilibus misera, &c. Tul. ad Mr. Marc.

 [(f) ] Plin. lib. &illegible; Chap. 32.

 [(g) ] Bellotum civilium insania omne sanctum & sa rum profanatur. Sen. lib. 1. de benef cap &illegible;.

 [(h) ] Male vicit qui pænitet victoriæ. Melius est enim ignoscere quam post victoriam pænitere, Senec. &illegible; 15.

 [(i) ] Imò tum plures fiunt &illegible; serm. 18.

 [(j) ] Vbibelium civile ingiur, innocentes, & &illegible; juxta cadunt. Tac. &illegible;

 [(k) ] Ecles. 9. 1.

 [(l) ] Senequaquã quæstus aut prædæ, sed ecclesiæ gratia hanc expeditionem &illegible;. Panorm lib. 3. de reb. gest. Alphon.

 [(m) ] qui desiderat pacem, præparat bellum. Vigitius.

 [(n) ] suscipienda bella sunt ut in Pace sine injuria vivotur. Tul. 1. offic.

 [(o) ] Sapientis pacis causa bellum gerunt ut laborem spe oth sustentant. Salust. ad Cæs.

 [(p) ] Non quæriturpax ut bellū exerceatur, sed bellum geritur, ut pax acquiratur. esto ergo belando pacificus, ut cos quos ex pugnas, ad pacis utiliratem vincendo perdu cas. Aug. in l de verb. dom.

 [(q) ] 2 Sam 10. 12.

 [(r) ] Hoc & ratio doctis, & necessitas barbaris, & mos gentibus &c. Cic. pro Milone.

 [(s) ] Exo, d. 17. 9.

 [(a) ] Forti &illegible; q’æ per bella tuetar a &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; defend &illegible; infirmos, vela latronibus locios, plena &illegible; est. Ambros de &illegible;

 [(b) ] Gen. 14. 14.

 [(c) ] Iusta bella &illegible; &illegible; quæ &illegible; injuries. &illegible;

 [(d) ] Be lam illu lest non &illegible; iustum, sea &illegible; necessarium, quum &illegible; illata defenditur. Gices. pro Milone.

 [(e) ] Sueton. in Aug. Chap. 21.

 [(f) ] Iudg. 19. 25. and &illegible; 1. 5. 2 Sam. 10. 12. Nehem. &illegible; 14.

 [(g) ] Deut. 13. 14. 2 Sam. 10. 12.

 [(h) ] Bellum honestum turpi pace preferendome? Demosthen.

 [(i) ] Quum tempus necessitasq; postulat, decertandu est manu & mors servituti turpitudinique anteponenda; nam occidi pulchrum est, si ignominiose servis, Cicer. in Tule, qu.

 [(k) ] Bellum est justum quod necessarisi est, & arma sant pia quibas nulla nisi in armis relinquitur spes, Liv. l. 9. dec. 1.

 [(l) ] Dedatse qui vult, fugiat qui vult, pugnet qui vult.

 [(m) ] Extrema primo nemo tentavit loco.

 [(n) ] Num. 10. 9. and 31. 2, 17. Iudg. 1. and 3. chapters.

 [(o) ] 5. nonfugere, sed utiltatem retro sitam perlequi.

 [(p) ] 2 Cro. &illegible; 11

 [(q) ] 2 Cro. 10. 12

 [(r) ] Psal. 44. 6. & 108. 13.

 [(s) ] Isa. 33. 2.

 [(t) ] Isa. 37. 20.

 [(u) ] Pro. 1. 16. & 28. 9.
Isa 1. 15. & 59. 2 Mic. 3. 10.

 [(x) ] Iam. 1. 6.

 [(a) ] Oh homo ideo non vicisti quia de cuopræsumpsisti. Qui præsumit de viribus &illegible; pugnet, prosterniter. Aug. de verb. Apost

 [(b) ] Eccles. 9. 11

 [(c) ] Livius.

 [(d) ] Diu apparandum est bellum ut vineas &illegible; quia lõgabells præpatatio celeré facit victorian Senec. epist. &illegible;.

 [(e) ] Parva sunt arma foris, si non est consilium domi. Sen. Epist. 15.

 [(a) ] Ordinaturus aciem, tria debet ante prospicere, solem, pulverent, ventum, &c. Veget. l. 13. cap. 14.

 [(b) ] Plutarch. in apoph.

 [(c) ] quirarò aut nunquam viderens homines vulnerari, vel occidi &illegible; prlmum aspexerint &c.

 [(d) ] Vigetius de re militari. lib. 1. cap. 6.

 [(e) ] Quum justà bell im suscipitur utram apertè pugnet quis, an ex insibus, nihil ad justitiam interest. Aug. 2d, Bonif.

 [(f) ] Boni duces non aperte prælio, in quo est cómune periculum, sed exocculto semper attentant. &c. Viget. l. 3. ca. 9.

 [(g) ] Aut &illegible; aut vi, aut apertè aut per insidias. Stob.

 [(h) ] Hi neque propagation neq. pro atis & focis, neque pro monumentis avorum, neque pro glorta, neque pro liberis neque pro libertate, periculum subcunt, sed tantum, ne alter ab altero superetur, ciq; cedere cogatur Ælian. lib. 2. cap. 28.

 [(i) ] &illegible; esse exercitium &illegible; duce Leone, quam Lenum duce cevo. Erasm. lib. 2. cap. 32. Facet.

 [(k) ] Expectare dum hostium copiæ a gentur, summa den. entia est. Iulius Cæl. Comment lib. 4.

 [(l) ] Tacitus.

 [(m) ] Livius.

 [(n) ] Quanta bellus, sed absque capi e. St. b.

 [(o) ] Si bona sucrit caula pugnantis, pugnæ exitus &illegible; &illegible; non potest & vice versa &c. Beru. denova militia.

 [(p) ] Victoria in bello nec multitudine, neque fortitudine patatur, sed divino auxilio. Xenophon. Stob. serm. 49.

 


8.10. William Prynne, A Vindication of Psalme 105.15 (6 December, 1642)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

William Prynne, A Vindication of Psalme 105.15. (Touch not mine Anoynted, and doe my Prophets no harme) form some false Glosses lately obtruded on it by Royallists. Proving that this Divine Inhibition was given to Kings, not Subjects; to restraine them from injuring and oppressing Gods servants, and their Subjects; who are Gods Anoynted as well as Kings: And that it is more unlawfull for Kings to plunder and make War upon their Subjects, by way of offence, then for Subjects to take up Armes against Kings in such cases by way of defence. With a briefe exhortation to peace and unity.
2 Samuel 23.3. He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the feare of God.
Ecclesiastes 4. 1, 2. I returned and considered all the Oppressions that are done under the Sunne; and behold the teares of such as were oppressed, and they had no Comforter : and on the side of their oppressors there was power, but they had no Comforter. Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead, more then the living which are yet alive.
Proverbs 28. 15, 16. As a roaring Lyon, and a ranging Beare, so is a wicked Ruler over the poore people. The Prince that wanteth understanding is also a great oppressour; but he that hateth covetousnesse shall prolong his daies.
Galathians 5. 15. But if ye bite and devoure one another, take heed that ye be not confused one of another.
Printed, 1642.

Estimated date of publication

6 December, 1642.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 203; Thomason E. 244. (1.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

THere is nothing more pernicious to the souls of men, or destructive to the republique in distracted times, then Clergy-mens wresting of Scriptures from their genuine sense to ensnare mens consciences, the better to accomplish some sinister designes. How sundry sacred texts have been thus perverted of later yeers, not by the* unlearned and unstable vulgar, but by the greatest Seraphicall Doctors in our Church, is too apparent unto all; and among* others that of the Psalmist, Psal. 105. 15, (which is repeated 1 Chron. 16. 22.) Touch not mine Anoynted, and do my Prophets no harm; hath not had the least violence offered it, both in Presse and Pulpit, to try up the absolute irresistable Prerogative of Kings in all their exorbitant proceedings; and beat down the just liberties of the Subject, without the least defensive opposition; when as this text, in real verity, is rather a direct precept given to Kings themselves, not to oppresse or injure their faithful subjects, then an injunction given to subjects, not to defend themselves against the oppressive destructive wars, and projects of their Princes. In which regard it wil be no unseasonable nor ungratefull worke, to cleare this text from all false Glosses, and restore it to its proper construction.

In former ages when popery domineered, the popish Clergy grounded their pretended exemption from all temporall jurisdiction on this Scripture; suggesting, that they onely, at least principally were Gods Anointed here intended; and therefore ought not be touched nor apprehended by Kings or temporall Iudges for any crimes. But this false Glosse being long since exploded, many Court Divines, not so much to secure as slatter Kings, have applyed it primarily unto Kings, and secundarily to Priests, as meant of them alone, excluding their faithfull Subjects out of its protection and limits; when as the text is meant of none else but they in general and of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with their families in particular.

1. To put this out of question: you must first observe, that this Psalm from the 5 verse to the end, is meerely historicall. The 7 first verses of it are but a gratulatory preamble (interlaced with some exhortations) to the subsequent historicall narration; as he that reads them advisedly will at first acknowledge: In the 8, 9, 10, & 11. verses, the Psalmist begins his history, with the covenant which God made to Abraham, and the oath which he sware to Isaac; and confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting testament: saying, unto thee will I give the land of Canann, the lot of your inheritance. In the 12, 13, 14, & 15. verses, he expresseth the special care and protection of God over Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their several families after his covenant thus made unto them, in these words: When they (to wit, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with their families) were but a few men in number, yea very few, and strangers in it: When they went from one Nation to another, from one Kingdom to another people (which cannot possibly be expounded of Kings and Priests, but onely of those Patriarcks) He suffered no man to doe them wrong, but reproved even Kings for their sakes, saying, Touch not mine Anoynted, and doe my Prophets no harme. Then in the very next verse to the end of the Psalm, he proceeds with the story of the famine in Egypt, and of Iosephs sending thither beforehand by God, &c. So that by the expresse words and series of the story in this Psalm, these persons of whom God said, Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme, were Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, and their families, (as S. Augustin with sundry other Expositers of this Psalm conclude;) who in truth were neither Kings nor Priests by office, but onely Gods peculiar people and servants: of whom he took special care. Whence I thus reason, in the first place.

These words, Touch not mine anointed, &c. were originally spoken and intended only of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, and their families, who were neither actual Kings nor Priests; & they were meant of them, not as they were Kings or Priests, but only as they were the servants and chosen people of God; as is evident by the 6 verse of this Psalm. O ye seed of Abraham his SERVANT, ye children of Jacob his CHOSEN.

Therefore they are to be so interpreted; and to be applyed not to Kings and Priests, as they are such; but only to the faithful servants and chosen people of God, though, and as subjects.

Secondly, Consider to whom these words were spoken; not to Subjects, but to Kings themselves; as the Psalmist resolves in expresse terms, Vers. 14. He suffered no man to do them wrong, but reproved even KINGS for their sakes; saying, (even to Kings themselves) Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme. Now that these words were spoken to Kings themselves is apparent, by those histories to which these words relate, recorded at large, Genes. 12. 10. to 20, Gen. &illegible; throughout, and Gen. 26. 1. to 17. and vers. 29. Where when Abraham by reason of the famine went down into Egypt, with Sarah his wife, and King Pharaoh tooke her into his house, God first permitted neither Pharaoh nor his servants to do either of them any injury (though Abraham out of over-much feare, suspected they would have killed him, and therefore made Satah say she was his sister,) and likewise plagued Pharaoh, and his servants because of Sarah Abrahams wife; whereupon they and all theirs went away in safety. After which Abraham and his wife sojourning in Gerar, Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah: But God said to Abimelech in a dream, behold thou art a dead man for the woman that thou hast taken, for she is a mans wife, &c. Therefore I sufferred thee not to touch her; Now therefore restore the man his wife, for he is a Prophet: (where, Touch not mine anoynted, and do my Prophets no harme, were litterally fulfilled:) and he shal pray for thee, and thou shalt live; and if thou restore her not, know that thou shalt surely die, thou and all that are thine: whereupon Abimelech restored Abraham his wife, and gave him Sheep, Oxen, Men-servants, and Women-servants, and leave to dwell in the Land where he pleased, After which Isaac and his wife dwelling in Gerar, and he telling the men of the place that she was his sister, lest they should kill him for her, because she was faire, king Abimelech discovering her to be his wife, charged all his people, saying, he that toucheth this man or his wife shall surely be put to death; yea he kindly intreated him, and did unto him nothing but good, and sent her away in peace. To which we may adde, the story of Gods prohibiting and restraining both Laban and Esau (who were as potent as Kings) to burt Jacob when they came out maliciously against him. Gen. 31. 24, 29, 52, 55. & ch. 33. 1, 2, 3, 4, &c. This prohibition then, Touch not mine anoynted, &c. being given to Kings themselves, not to touch or hurt these Patriarchs whiles they sojourned among them as forraigners and subjects (as all expositours grant) and not to subjects touching their Kings; these two conclusions will hence necessarily follow.

  • 1.  That this inhibition, given to Kings themselves with reference to subjects, and the people of God, cannot properly be meant of Kings and Priests, but of subjects fearing God. It is most apparant, that Kings, Princes and Rulers of the earth have alwaies been the greatest enemies and persecutors of Gods anointed ones, to wit, of Christ and his chosen members; witnesse Ps. 2. 2. & Act. 4. 26, 27. The Kings of the Earth set themselves, and the Rulers take counsell together against the Lord, & against his anoynted: For of a truth against thy holy child Iesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pentius Pslate, with the Gentiles and people of Israel were gathered together, &c. And now Lord behold their threatnings. Which truth you may see exemplified by Ps. 129. 23, 161. Ier. 26. 21, 22, 23. c. 36. 26. c. 37. 15. c. 38. 4, 5, 6. Ezek. &illegible; 6, 7, 27, 28. Mich. 3. 1. to 12 Zeph. 3. 3. 1 Sam. 22. 16. to 20. 2 Chron. 24. 21. 1 King. 22. 26, 27. c. 29. 2. 10. Rev. 17. 12, 13, 14. c. 18. 9. 10. c. 19. 18, 19. Math. 10. 17. 18. Ln. 21. 12. Iam: 2. 6. Act. 12. 1, 2, 3. with sundry other Scriptures, and by all ecclesiastical histories since. In which regard God in his infinite wisdome gave this divine inhibition, not to subjects and inferiour persons; but to Kings, Princes and the greatest Potentates (who, deem their wils a law, and think they may do what they* please to their godly subiects,) Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme: which being spoken to Kings themselves; it cannot be meant of Kings but subjects; unlesse you wil make this nonsence exposition of it. That Kings must not touch nor hurt themselves; and that it is unlawfull for one King to make war against, imprison, depose, or kill another: which the practise of all ages, with infinite* presidents in Scripture and story, manifest to be lawful, and not prohibited by this text; which can properly be applyed to none, but subjects fearing God.
  • 2.  That all Gods faithfull people are Gods anoynted, as well as Kings: and therefore as our Court Sycophants conclude from hence, That Subjects may in no wise take up Armes (though meerely defensive) against their Kings, because they are Gods anoynted: so by the self-same reason, the genuine proper meaning and expresse resolution of this text, Kings ought not to take up Armes against their Subjects, especially those professing the true feare of God, because they are Gods anoynted too, as well as Kings.

If any Court-Chaplan: here demand; how I prove beleeving Subjects fearing God, to be his anoynted, as well as Kings or Priests?

I answer: first the scripture resolves expresly: That all true Christians are really (in a spirituall sence) both* Kings and Priests to God the Father, though they be but subjects in a politicke sence yea God hath prepared a heavenly kingdom, (with an eternall crown of glory) for them, where they shall raigne with Christ for ever and ever. Mat. 5. 3. c. 25. 34. Lu. 6. 20. c. 12. 32. c. 22. 29. 30 Col. 1. 13. 1 Thef. 2. 12. Heb. 12. 28 Iam. 2. 5. 2 Pet. 1. 11. 2 Tim. 4. 8. 1 pet. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 9. 25. Rev. 22. 5. 2 Tim. 2. 12. Being therefore thus really Kings and Priests, and having an heavenly Kingdome and Crown of Glory, wherein they shall raigne with Christ for ever in this regard they may as truly be called Gods anoynted, as any Kings and Priests whatsoever.

Secondly, all true Christians are members of Christ and of his body, flesh and bone and made one with Christ, who dwelleth in them, and they in him. 1. Cor. 11. 12. 17. Ephes. 1. 22. 23. c. 3. 17. c. 5. 29. 30. 32. Iohn 6. 51. c. 17. 21. 23. In which respect they are not onely stiled Christians in Scripture, Act. 11. 26. c. 26. 28. 1. Pet. 4. 16. But Christ himself, 1. Cor. 10. 12. Ep. 4. 12. 13. Now our Saviour himself is stiled Christ in Scripture, in the abstract, by way of Excellency, onely because he is the Lords anoynted; anoynted with the oyle of gladnesse above his fellowes. Ps. 45. 7. Psa, 2. 2. Isa. 61. 1. Ac. 4. 23. c. 10. 38. Lu. 4. 18. He. 1. 9. Christos in the Greek, signifying anointed in English, being derived from Chris to anoynt: And Christians had this very title given them, because they are Christs members, and have a spirituall* anoyntment in, by, and from Christ, and his Spirit, 1 Iohn 2. 27. But the ANOYNTING which ye have received of him abideth in you. and ye need not that any man teach you, but as the same ANOINTING teacheth you of all things. Therefore they are really and truly Gods anoynted, and may be as properly so phrased, as any Kings and Priests whatsoever.

Thirdly, the scripture in direct termes oft cals Gods people, (though subjects) Gods anointed: as Psa. 28. 8. 9. The Lord is their strength, and be is the saving health of his anoynted. Now who those are, is expressed in the following words, save thy people, blesse thine inheritance, guide them and lift them up for ever. Gods people are here defined to be his anoynted. So Ps. 18. 50. And sheweth mercy to his anoynted; (but who are they?) to David & to his seed for evermore, that is, to Christ and his elect childre here caled Gods anointed, Ha. 3. 13. Thom wentest forth for the salvation of thy people, even for salvation with thine anoynted. 2 Cor. 1. 21. Now he which establisheth us in Christ, and hath anoynted us, is God, &c. 1 Joh. 2. 27. The anoynting which ye have received of him, abideth in you, &c. All these, with other scriptures, thus resolving Gods people (though subject) to be his anointed ones; they may be properly said to be the persons specified in this text, Touch not my anoynted; being an injunction given to Kings themselves, and not meant of Kings, but of Gods people, as I have formerly manifested.

I shall willingly and cordially professe, that Kings in sacred writ, are commonly called Gods anointed; because they were usually anoynted with oyle upon their inauguration to their thrones Sa. &illegible; &illegible; 15. 17. c. 12. 3. 5. c. 16. 3. 5. c. 16. 3. c. 12. 13. c. 24. 6. 10. c. 26. 6. 11. 16, 23. 2. Sa. 1. 14. 6. c. 2. 4. 7. &illegible; &illegible; 34. 3. &illegible; 2 Kin. 9. 3. 6. 12. 2 Chro. 6. 42. Psal. 20. 6. Psal. 89. 20. 38. 51. Psal. 92. 12. &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; 45. 1. Lun. 4. 20. And in this regard their persons are sacred, & no violence ought to be &illegible; upon their persons, especially by their subjects, as is cleare by the 1 Sam. 24. 3. to 12. 17. 18. 19, ch. 26. 7. to 25. 2 Sam. 2. to 7. And thereupon this text, Touch not mine anointed, and doe my Prophets no harms, though not properly meant of Kings, may yet be aptly applyed to their personal safety. But then I say, on the contrary part. That all Gods saints and people though Subiects, are his anoynted ones as well as Kings; wheesore Kings must no more offer violence to their persons or estates (without legal conviction and iust cause) then they offer violence to their Kings, which I shall thus make cleare.

First, because God hath given this expresse injunction even to Kings themselves, Touch not mine anoynted (that is your subiectes, my faithfull seruants) and doe my Prophets no harme, ps. 105. 14. 15. 1 Chr. 16. 2. 12. Prohibiting Abimelech, and he his subiects so much as to touch Abraham, Sarah, or Isaac. Gen. 20. 6. ch. 26. 11. 29.

Secondly, because he that toucheth them (to do them harme) toucheth the very apple of Gods eye. Zep. 2. 8. psal. 17. 8. 9. Deu. 32. 9. 10. 11. Yea, persecuteth God, nay Christ himselfe, Isai. 36. 9. Mat. 25. 45. Act. 9. 4. 5. And what Kings, how great soever, may or dare touch or persecute God and Christ, the King of Kings?

Thirdly, because God himself hath quite &illegible; Kings and their posterities, for offering violence to his servants though their subiects. Thus Ahab, Iezabell, and their posterity were destroyed for putting Naboth to death, and seizing on his Vineyard wrongfully without cause, though under a pretext of law, 1 Kin. 21. & 22. 2 Kin. 9. So King Ioash exciting his people to stone the prophet Zachariah without good cause, which they did at his commandement; the Princes and people who did it were soon after destroyed by the Syrians; and the Kings own servants conspired against him for the bloud of Zachariah, and stew him on his bed, and then buried him dishonourably, not in the sepulcher of the Kings, So as his prayer at his death (the Lord look upon it and require it) was fully executed on the King and people, 2 Crho. 24. 20. to 27. Thus King Ichoahaz, leharachin, and Ichoiachins with all their Princes and people were carried away captive into Babilon, and destroyed for mocking, abusing and despising Gods messengers, prophets and people, 2 Chr. 36. 16. 17.* Many such instances might be added, but these may suffice, and that of the King of Babilon, Isa. 14. 4. 19. 20. 21. 22. But thou art cast out of thy grave as an abominable branch, &c. as a carcase trodden under feet. thou shalt not not beloyned with them buriall. BECAUSE THOU HAST DESTROYED THY LAND, AND SLAINE THY PEOPLE: the seed of evil doers shall never be renouned, prepare ye slaughter for his children, for the iniquity of their fathers, that they doe not vise, nor possesse the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities. For I will rise up against them saith the Lord of Hosts, and cut off from Babilon the name and remembrance, and sons, and nephewes, saith the Lord. A notable text, for oppressing Princes to meditate upon.

Fourthly, because God himselfe hath given an expresse command, Ezek. 44. 15. 16. 17. That the Prince shall not take of the peoples inheritance by oppression to thrust them out of their possession, but he shall give his sonnes inheritance cut of his own possession. Which well interpreteth and fully answereth that much abused text in the 1 Sam. 8. 11. 12. 19. and proves the Kings taking their Fields, Vineyards, Oliveyards, &illegible; and sheep to give his servants there specified, to be a meere oppression, which should make them cry out in that day because of their King, ver. 18. and no lawfull act, as some royalists glosse it. If then Kings may not take away by violence or oppression their subjects lands or goods; muchlesse may they offer violence to their persons, being Gods anointed, yea his Temple, 1 Cor. 6. 19. c. 3. 16. And if any man (be he King or Emperour) destroy the temple of God, him will God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple they are 1 Cor. 3. 17. Hence Ioah, Davids Generall, comming to besiege Abel to which Shebasted, a women of that place thus &illegible; with him thou seekest to destroy a City and mother in Israel: why wilt thou swallow up the inheritance of the Lord? Whereupon Ioah answered and said: for be it, for be it from me that I should swallow up or destroy, 2 Sam. 20. 19. 20.

Fiftly, because no law of God or man hath given any authority to Kings to iniure or oppresse their subiects, in body lands or goods, but only to feed, defend, protect them; and to fight their battels for them, not to wage war against them. 2 Sam. 6. 2. c. 23. 3. Psal. 78. 72, 73, 74. 2 Chron. 9. 8. Pro. 20, 8, 24. c. 29. 4. 14. Esay 49. 23. 1 Tim. 2. 3. Therefore Kings having no right at all to injure or oppresse their people, they* neither lawfully can nor ought to do it, either by themselves or instruments; there being nothing more severely prohibited and censured in Scripture then Princes and Magistrates oppression of their Subjects, Prov. 28. 15, 16. Zeph. 3. 3. Michah. 3. 9, to 12. Ezek. 22. 6, 7, 27. Take but one text for many, Ezek. 45. 8, 9. My Princes shal no more oppresse my people, and the rest of the land shal they give to the house of Israel according to their Tribes. Thou saith the Lord God, let it suffice you, O Princes of Israel, remove violence and spoyle (or plundering) and execute judgment and justice; take away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord, See Esa. 1. 23. c. 3. 12, 14, 15.

Sixtly, Because as there is a solemne* Oath of allegeance, of the people to their Kings, to honour and defend their persons; So there is the like oath from kings to their people, to protect their rights and persons, goods, estates, lives, lawes, and liberties, from all violence and injustice, solemnly sworn at their Coronations. By vertue of which oath Kings are as strictly tyed not to wage war against their Subjects,Esay 45. 4. 1 Sam. 8. 19, 6, 20. nor to oppresse or offer violence to their persons, liberties, or estates; as their subjects are by their oath of allegiance, not to rebel against them. And seeing Kings were first created by and* for their subjects; and not their subjects by and for them; and are in verity but publicke servants for their peoples welfare,1 Chr. 9. &illegible; 1 Cor. 3. 21. 22. their subjects not being so much theirs, as they their subjects; from whom they* receive both their maintenance and royalties. There is as little (if not far lesse) reason, for Kings to oppresse and take up offensive armes against their subjects though perchance more undutiful and refractory then they expect; as there is for people to take up offensive armes against their Princes, in case they become more oppressive and invasive on their persons, goods, lawes, liberties, then they should.Rom. 13. 4. The husband hath no more right or authority to injure or destroy the wife, or the master the servant, the head the inferiour members, then they have to destroy the husband, master, or head. And as the leudnesse of the King, husband, parent, master, must not cause the people, wife, child, servant, to rebel against them,Math. 22. 17. to 22. and utterly to reject their bonds of duty, so the undutifulnes or vices of the people, wife, child, or servant, must not cause the King, husband, parent, or master, (as long as these relations remain actually undissolved) to give over their care* protection, and vigilancy over them, or any waies injuriously to intreat them 1 Pet. 2. 18. 2 Chro. 10. & 11.

Finally, the* Hebrew Midwives, notwithstanding K. Pharohs command, would by no means kil the Israelites male children; (though but bondmen and no free subjects) and God blessed, and built them houses for it: but* drowned Pharoah and his host in the red sea, for drowning them, and transgressing this inhibition, Touch not mine anointed: When* K. Saul commanded his footmen and guard, to turn and slay the Priests of the Lord at Nob, because their hand was with David (whom he deemed a traytor) and knew when he fled, and did not shew it him, they all refused (this his royall unjust command, though not only his Subjects, but servants too) and would not put their hand to fall upon them, being Gods anointed: And because Doeg the Edemire slew them, by Sauls command, Saul himself was soon after slaint by his own hand, 1 Sam. 31. 4. When* K. Saul had twice solemnly vowed to put his innocent son and subject Ionathan causelesly to death, onely for tasting a little honey; his subjects were so far from assisting him in this unjust action, that they presently said to their King, Shal Ionathan die who hath wrought so great salvation in Israel? God forbid: As the Lord liveth, there shal not one haire of his head fall to the ground: So the people RESCVED Jonathan that he died not, notwithstanding Sauls double vow to the contrary, and Ionathans being not only his subject, but son too, which is more; neither are they taxed of disobedience or treason, but commended for it. When* K. Rehoboam raised an army to fight against the ten tribes, who revolted from, and rebelled against him, (for giving them harsh language by the advice of his yong Counsellors;) electing a new King over them: God himself by his Prophet Shemiah, spake thus to Rehoboam and his army,* Ye shal not go up, nor fight against your brethren, return every man to his house, for this thing is done of me: Whereupon they all obeyed the words of the Lord, and returned: neither King nor subject daring to fight against them, contrary to Gods expresse command, though rebels how much lesse then may Kings wage war upon their innocent loyall subjects? When* K. Ichoram in his fury made this &illegible; &illegible; do so, and more also to me, if the head of Elisha (his subject) shalest and on him this day; and withall sent a messenger to Elisha his house to take away his head. This Prophet was so far from submitting to this his unjust design, that he commanded the Elders sitting with him to look when the messenger came, and &illegible; the doore, and hold him fast, though the sound of his masters (the Kings) &illegible; were behind &illegible; which they did; not suffering the messenger or King to do him violence. You the great* Prophet &illegible; when K. Ahariah sent two Captains with their fifties one after another to apprehend and bring him down to him by violence; was so far from rendering himself into their hands; that in his own defence, he commanded fire twice together to come down &illegible; heaven which confused these two Captains and their mon; though sent by the King his Soveraign. Which divine miracle from heaven wrought by God himself &illegible; That it is lawful for subjects to defend themselves against the unjust violence of their Kings; and that it is dangerous for Kings themselves, or any of their officers by their commands to offer violence or injury to their subjects.* This may be further cleared by Gods exemplary judgement upon K. Ieroboam; who stretching forth his hand to smite the Prophet, which prophecied against his idolatrous Altar, it dried up forthwith, so that he could not pull it in again.* Upon those Princes who caused Daniel to be unjustly cast into the Lyons den, where he was preserved safe from danger; but they their wives and children had there their bones broken in pieces by the Lyons or ever they came at the bottom of the &illegible; And upon those* mighty men in Nebuchadnezzars army, who bound Shadrach, Mesech, and Abednego, and cast them into the burning fiery fornace, by the kings speciall command, because they peremptorily refused to worship the golden image which he hath set up; who for executing this his unjust precept, were by Gods just vengence slain by the flame of the fiery furnace; when as those three godly persons unjustly cast into it by the Kings command, were miraculously preserved in the midst of the fiery furnace, without any harme, there being not an haire of their heads singed, neither their coates changed, nor the smell of fire passed upon them. So safe is it for people to* obey God rather then men, then kings themselves in their unjust commands: so dangerous and destructive is it for Kings, or others upon their unjust commands, to offer any injury or violence to their subjects; or violate this injunction, Touch not &illegible; anointed, &c. In a word, I read Ier. 12. 3. to 12 that God commanded King. Shallum, to execute judgment and righteousnes, and deliver the spoiled out of the hands of the oppressor; & do us wrong nor violence to the stranger, fatherles, or widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place. Adding, But if ye shal not heare these words, I swear by my selfe, saith the Lord, that this house (even the kings house of Judah) shal become a desolation, I wil make it a wildernesse, and prepare destroyers against it, every one with his weopan, &c. And v. 15. to 30. in the same chap. God thus speaks to K. Iehoiakim, Shalt thou raign because thou closest thy self in Cedar? Did not thy father eat and drink, & do judgment and justice, and then it was well with him? &c. But thine eyes, and thine heart were not but for thy covetousnes, and to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, & for violence to do it. Therfore thus saith the Lord concerning Jehoiakim K. of Iudah; they shal not lament for him saying, ah my brother, or ah sister; ah Lord, or ah his glory; but he shal be buried with the burial of an asse drawn & cast forth beyond the graves of Ierusale. Neither doth this judgment for oppressing & slaying his subjects rest here, but extend to the utter extirpation of his posterity, ver. 24. 30. As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah the son of Iehoiakim, K. of Iudah, were the signet on my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence. Write ye this man childlesse, a man that shal not prosper in his daies, for no man of his seed shal prosper sitting upon the thron of David. So fatal is it to Kings and their posterity to oppresse and murther their subjects. And as for those subjects who by their Kings commands shal take up armes against their brethen to murther, plunder, or oppresse them, I shal desire them first to consider, that precept of Iohn Baptist given to souldiers themselves, Luk. 3. 14. De violence to no man, &c. muchles to your brethren and fellow-subjects: and next that of &illegible; v. 10. to 16 For thy violence against thy brother Iacoh, shame shal cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever. In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away his substance, and enteredinto his gates; and cast lots upon Ierosulem, even thou wast as one of them. But thou shouldest not have looked on the day of thy brother, neither shouldest thou have rejoyced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction; neither shouldest thou have spoken proudly in the day of distresse, Thou shouldest not have Entered into the gate of my people, nor have looked on their affliction, nor have laid hands on their substance in the day of their calamity; Neither shouldest thou have stood in the crosse way, to cut off those of his which did escape; neither shouldest thou have shut up those of his that did remain in the day of distresse. As thou hast done it shall be done unto thee, thy sword shal return upon thine own head. All which cosidered, I shal humbly submit it to every mans judgment, whether the whol state in Parliament and his Majesties faithful subjects, may not upon as good or better grounds of conscience, take up armes to defend and preserve their persons, wives, houses, goods, estates from unlawful violence, rapine, plundering and destruction, now every where practised by his Majesties Cavaleeres in a most* barbarous manner, to the utter ruine of many thousands for the present, and whol kingdom in likelihood for the future, contrary to the fundamental lawes and liberties of the subject, his Majesties Coronation oath, and frequent protestations and Declarations; As his Majesty, by advice of ill counsellors, raise an army at home, and bring in forren* forces from abroad, to make war upon his Parliament and people, to plunder, murder, undoe them, and being the whole kingdome to utter desolation? Certainly, if the subjects defensive war in this case be unlawful; as all Royalists aver, against Scripture, reason, and the principles of nature, which instinct all creatures to defend themselves against unjust violence and oppession, as others have proted at large. Then the Kings offensive war upon his loyall poore innocent subjects and Parliament, must much more be unjust and unlawful, for the premised reasons, and Scripture authorities.

For my part, it is so far from my intention to foment this most unnatural destructive war between King Parliament, and people, that the thoughts of its deplorable effects do make my very soule to bleed, and heart to tremble. For if ever Christ, the Oracle of truth, uttered any verity truer than other, it was this,* That a kingdom divided against it self cannot stand, but shall be brought to desolation;* And if we bite and devour one another,Marke 3. 24, 25, 26. we shall be consumed one of another. O then (if God in his justice hath not devoted us to a totall & final desolation for the sins and abuses of our long enjoyed former peace) if there be any remainder of policy or prudence, any bowels of mercy on tender affection left within us, towards our most deere native bleeding and also expiring Country, Engand; to poore dying Ireland; to our religion lives wives children, parents, kindred, neighbours, goods, estates, liberties; or any care of our own safety, tranquillity or felicity; let all of all sides now at last, (after so much sensible experience of the miseries of an intestine uncivill war) with all convenient expedition lay down offensive and defensive armes, & conclude such a sweet solid peace throughout our divided and distracted kingdom as may last forever without the least violation, upon such just and honourable terms, as may stand with Gods glory, religions purity, his Majesties honour, the Parliaments priviledges, the subjects liberty, the whole kingdoms safety and felicity; least otherwise we become not only a scorn and derision, but likewise a prey to our forraign enemies. Alasse, why should the head and members have any civil contestations, since both must perish if divided?* neither subsist, but being united? why should the Kings prerogative, and the subjects liberties, which seldom clashed heretofore, and ended all differences in Courts of justice, be now at such irreconcileable enmity, as to challenge one another into the field, and admit no trial but by battel? when I read in* Scripture, of sundry presidents where Kings, Princes, and people, have unanimously concurred in their counsels heretofore; and consider how our King and Parliament have most happily accorded till of late, I cannot but bewaile their present discords; which O that the God of peace and unity would speedily reconcile.

2 Sam. 18. 4. c. 19. 43, c. 9. 2. 10. 11. lomh 3. 7. Ester 1. 13. to &illegible; 30. 40.I shal close up all, with his Majesties printed speech to both houses annexed to the petition of right by his Royal command. I assure you my maxime is, That the peoples Liberty strengthens the Kings Prerogative, and that the Kings Prerogative is to defend the peoples Liberties: And with the Statute of Magna Charta, ch. 29. No freeman shal be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his freehold, or liberties or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or any other waies destroyed, nor we shal not passe upon him, nor condemn him, but by the lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the law of the Land. We shal sel to we man, no shal deny nor defer to no man justice or right: Which in effect is a most exact paraphrase on this misconstrued text, Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harme.

FINIS.

Endnotes

 [* ] 2 Pet. 2. 16.

 [* ] As the 2 Sam. 15. 24. For Rebellion is as the &illegible; of Witchcraft, & &illegible; is as iniquity and idolatry; now applied to subjects opposing their Princes unlawfull commands, when it is meant only of King Sauls rebellion against the command of God, as the content and story manifest.

 [* ] Zech. 11. 5.

 [* ] Read the 2 Chr. 36. Dan. 5. 30. 31. Ps. 136. 17. 18. 19. 20. 10f. 12. for all the rest.

 [* ] Rev. 1. 6. c. 5. 10. c. 20. 6. Exo. 19. 6. 2 Pet. 2. 5.

 [* ] See Eze. 16. 9. I anoynted thee with Oyle, &c.

 [* ] See Dr. Beards The &illegible; of Gods Iudgements. L. 2. c. 17. 18. 19. 38. 39. 40. 41.

 [* ] Cooks 11: Rep. f. 72. 86. Plowd. Com. f. 146, 147, 487. 21 E. 3. 47.

 [* ] 1 Eliz. c. 2.

 [* ] 2 Sam. 5. 12 1 Pet. 2. 13. Deut. 17. 14, 15.

 [* ] Rom. 13. 6.

 [* ] Nam Rex ad tutelam legis, corparuim & bonorum erectur est, Ca. 7. Rep. Calvins case, f. 4, 10, 12.

 [* ] Exo. 1. 15. to 20.

 [* ] Exod. 14. 13. to 31. Psa. 106. 21.

 [* ] 1 Sam. 22. 17, 18.

 [* ] 1 Sam. 14. 38, to 46.

 [* ] 2 Chro. 10.

 [* ] 2 Chro. 11. 4. 1 King. 11. 21, 22, 23, 24.

 [* ] 1 King, 6, 31, 32, 33.

 [* ] 2 Kin. 10, 9, to 16.

 [* ] 1 Kings 12. 6.

 [* ] Dan. 6.

 [* ] Dan. 3.

 [* ] Act 4: 12 c. 5. 18, 19, 40, 52. c. 11, 1, to 19. Este. 3. 2, 3 Iohn 7. 33, to 48. Numb. 22. & 23. & 24.

 [* ] See the Relation of Brainford businesse.

 [* ] See the Letter fro the Hague newly printed.

 [* ] Luke 11. 17, 18, 19.

 [* ] Gal. 5. 25.

 [* ] See 1 Cor. 12. 14. to 26.

 [* ] 1 Chro. 13. 1, 2, 3, 4. 2 Chro. 23. 3. c. 13. 1. to Iudg. 10. 1. 10. 12.

 


8.11. Anon., The Privileges of the House of Commons (31 December, 1642)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., THE PRIVILEDGES Of the House of COMMONS IN PARLIAMENT Assembled. Wherein ’tis proved their Power is equall with that of the House of Lords, if not greater, though the King joyn with the Lords. However it appears that both the Houses have a Power above the King, if He Vote contrary to them. All which is proved by severall Presidents taken out of Parliament Rolls in the TOWER. By P. B. Gentleman.
London, Printed for J. R. 1642.

Estimated date of publication

31 December, 1642.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 214; Thomason E. 83 (39.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Priviledges of the House OF COMMONS IN PARLIAMENT.

WHen after the period of the Saxon time, Harold had lifted himself into the Royall Stat: the great men to whom but lately he was no more then equall, either in fortune or power, disdaining that Act of Arrogancy, called in William then Duke of Normandy, a Prince more active then any in these Western-parts, and renowned for many Victories, he had most fortunately archieved against the French King, then the most potent Monarch in Europe.

This Duke led along with him to this work of glory, many of the younger. Sonnes of the best Families of Normandy, Picardy, and &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; accompanyed the undertaking of this fortunate man.

The Usurper was slain, and the Crown by this Duke was gained; and to secure certain to his posterity, what he had so suddenly gotten, he shared out his purchase, retaining in each County a portion to support the Dignity, Soveraign, which was styled &illegible; Regni; and assigning to the rest of his Adventures, such portions as suited to their quality and expence, he retained to himself, dependency of their personall service, except such Lands as in free Alms were the portion of the Church; and these were styled Barones Regis, the Kings immediate Freeholders, for the word Baro imported then no more.

Now as the King to these, so these to their followers, subdivided part of their shares into Knights Fees, and their Tennants were called Barones Comites for we (as in the Kings Writs) in their writs, Baronibus suis & Francois & Anglois, the Soveraign gifts for the most part extending to whole Counties, or Hundreds an Earl being Lord of the one, and a Baron of the inferiour Donations to Lords of Townships or Mannors.

And as the Land, so was all course of Judicature divided, even from the meanest, to the highest portion, each severall had his Court of Law; preferring still the manner of our Ancestors, the Saxons, who jura per pages reddebant; and these are still termed Court-Barons, or the Freeholders-Court, twelve usually in number; who with the Thame or chief Lord were Judges.

The Hundred that was next, where the Hundredus or Aldermanus, Lord of the Hundred, with the chief Lord of each Township within their Lymits were Judges.

The County or generale placitum was the next, This was to supply the defect or remedy, the corruption of the inferiour Courts. Ubi curiæ Dominorum probantur defecisse, pertinet ad vicecomitem provinciarum; and the Judges here were Comites, Vicecomites, & Barones Comitatus qui liberas terras habebant.

The last and supreme (and upon which I am to treat) was generale placitum apud London, Universalis Synodus in the Charters of the Conqueror, Capitalis curia by Glanvile, or magnum & commune consilium coramrege & magnatious suis.

In the Rolles of Henry the third, It is not Stattve but summoned by Proclamation, Edicitur general: placitum apud London, (saith the Book of Abingdon) whether Epium Ditces principes, Satrapæ rectores, & causidici ex omni pærte confluxerunt ad istam curiam, saith Glanvile. Causes were referred, propter aliquam dubitationem quæ emergit in Comitatu, cum Comitatus nescit dijudicare. Thus did Ethelweld Bishop of Winchester, transferre his suite against Leostine from the County, ad generate placitum; in the time of King Etheldred, Queene Edgine against Goda from the County, appeald to King Etheldred at London, Congregatis principibus & Angliæ sapientibus. In the tenth yeer of the Conqueror, Episcopi, Comites, & Barones Regni ad Universalum Synodum pracausis audiendis & tractandis convocati, saith the Book of Westminster; and this continued all along in the succeeding Kings raign, untill towards the end of Henry the third.

As this great Court or Councell, consisting of the King and Barons, ruled the great affairs of State, and controuled all inferiour Courts: So were there certain Officers, whose transcendent Power seemed to be set to bound in the execution of Princes Wills, as the Steward, Constable, and Marshall, fixt upon Families in Fee for many Ages; They as Tribunes of the people, (or ex plori among the Atherians) grown by unmanly courage, fearfull to Monarchy, fell at the feet and mercy of the King, when the daring Earl of Leicester was slain at Evesbam.

This chance, and the dear experience, Henry the third himself had made at the Parliament at Oxford, in the fortieth yoer of his raign, and the memory of the many streights his Father was driven unto (especially at Rumny-Mead neer States) brought this King wisely to begin what his Successor fortunately finished in lessening the strength and power of his great Lords; and this was wrought by searching into the Regality they had usurped over their peculiar Soveraigne, whereby they were as the Book of Saint Albane termeth them, Quot domini tot tiranni; and by the weakning that hand of Power which they carried in the Parliaments, by commanding the Service of many Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, to that Magnum consilium, or generale placitum, which we still call Parliament.

Now began the frequent sending of Writs to the Commons, their assent being used not only in Money, Charge, and making of Laws, (for before all Ordinances were passed by the King and Peers) but their consent is likewise used in all Judgements of all Natures, either Civill or Criminall: In proof whereof, I will produce some few presidents out of Record.

When Adamor that proude Prelate of Winchester, the Kings half Brother, had grieved the State by his daring Power, he was exiled by joynt sentence of the King, the Lords and Commons; and this appears expressely by the Letter sent from Pope Alexander the fourth, Expostulating a Revocation of him from banishment, because he was a Church-man, and so not subject to any censure: to this the answer was, Si dominus Rex & regni Majores hoc vellint (meaning his Revocation) Communitas tamen ipsius ingressum in Angliam nullatenus sustincret. The Peers subsigned this answer with their names; and Petrus de Mountford vice tatius communitatis, as Speaker of the Commons. Lib. S. Alban. fol. 20. Anno 44. H. 3.

And by that style, Sir John Tiptofe, Prolocutor, affirmeth under his Arms, the deed of intail of the Crown by King Henry 4. in the 8. yeer of his raign for all the Commons.

The banishment of the two Spencers in Edward the seconde time, prælati Comites & Barones & les auters Peers de la terre & Communes da be Roialme, give consent and sentence to the Revocation and Reversment of the former sentence; The Lords and Commons accord, and so it is expressed in the Roll.

When Elizabeth the Widdow of Sir John de Burgo complained in Parliament, that Hugh Spencer the younger, Robert Boldock, and William Cliffe his Instruments had by duresse, forced her to make a writing to the King, whereby she was despoiled of all her Inheritance; sentence is given for her in these words, Pur ceo que avis est al Evesquez Counts & Barones & les auters grandes, & a tout Cominalte de la terre que le dit escript est suit encounter be ley; & &illegible; manner deraison si suist le dit escript per agard del Parliament dampne elloques abliune a le dit Elizab.

In Anno the fourth of Edward the third, Prarl. Prim. rot. 11. It appears by a Letter to the Pope, That to the sentence given against the Earl of Kent, the Commons were Parties, as well as the Lords, or Peers; for the King directed their proceeding in those words; Comitibus Magnatibus Baronibus & aliis de Communitate dicti regni ad Parliamentum illud congregatis injunximus ut super his discercetent & judicarent quod rationi & justitiæ conveniret, & haberent pro oculis solum deum qui eum concordi, &c.

When in the fortieth yeer of Edward the third, the Lords had pronounced the sentence against Richard Lions, otherwise then the Commons agreed to. The Commons appeald to the King himself, and had redresse, and the sentence entred to their desires; Yet this does not prove that the Kings Power is so farre beyond the Parliaments, as that he can do what he will, notwithstanding them.

When in the first yeer of Richard the second, William Weston, and John Jennings, were arraigned in Parliament, for surrendring certain Forts of the Kings; the Commons were parties to the sentence given against them as appears by a Memorancium annext to that Record.

In the first of Henry the fourth, Although the Commons referred by Protestation, the pronouncing of sentence of deposition against Richard the second, unto the Lords; yet they are equally interressed in it, as it appears by the Record. For there was made Proctors or Commissioners for the whole Parliament, one B. one Abbot, one Earl, one Baron, and two Knights, Grey and Erpingham for the Commons; and to inferre, that because the Lords pronounced the sentence, the point of judgement should be only theirs, were as absurd as to conclude, That no authority was left in any other Commissioner of Oyer and Terminor, then in the Person of that man solely that speaks the sentence.

In the second of Henry the fifth, The Petition of the Commons importeth, no lesse then a right they had to Act and Assent to all things in Parliament, and so it was answered by the King; and had not the adjournall Roll of the higher House bin left to he sole entry of the Clark of that House (who either out of his neglect to observe due forme, or out of purpose to obscure the Commons right, and to flatter them, which he immediately served) there would have been frequent examples of all times to clear this doubt, and to preserve a jast interrest to the Common-wealth; and most conveniently doth it suite with Monarchy to maintain this forme, least others of that well framed body, knit under one head should swell too great and monstrous: Monarchy again may sooner groan under the weight of an Aristocracy as it once did, then under Democracy, which it never yet either felt or feared.

FINIS.

 


8.12. John Norton, The Miseries of War (17 January, 1643)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Norton, THE MISERIES OF VVAR. By a lover of TRVTH AND PEACE: And by him Dedicated to all that are such.
REVEL. 13.10. He that killeth with the sword, must be killed with the sword.
Printed for Nicholas Vavasor. 1643.

Estimated date of publication

17 January, 1643.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 222; Thomason E. 85 (13.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

THE MISERIES OF VVARR.

WHen I consider our late lost happinesse of a blessed Peace, and the heavy pressures of this present Warre; I find it hard to judge, which of them may bee justly called our greatest affliction: but both being laid together (sure I am) harder misfortune nere befell a Nation. And yet I find a sort of Salamander spirits (in what torrid flames of cursed contention noutisht, I cannot tell) that will admit of nought that sounds of Peace; but cry downe all accommodation, unlesse their owne prodigious fancies (conditions worse then Warre) may be the ingredients.

Eccl. 10. 8But let such Jucendiaries take heede least they fall into the Pit that they themselves have digged: For who may in common presumpsition be more justly charged to be the Authors, and Fomenters of Warre, then such as shall oppose a Peace: I have beene very inquisitve to know, what may bee the true ground of this unnaturall Warre; the most, and most discreet, to whom I have propounded that Question, Ingeniously confesse, they are ignorant of it: Others; that will be ignorant of nothing, and scarse rightly understand anything, will tell you the cause as readily, as if they were the Founders of it. Yet I cannot meet with any two of them that concurre in the same particular, onely thus farre they agree in the generall, that it is for the maintenance of the Protestant Religion, and the Lawes of the Land.

Why, this is pretended on both sides? But if that bee the quarrell, certainly the Question hath beene hitherto mistaken, or at least, mis stated; for neither Law nor Religion are any ways opposite to Peace.

Warre and the Law are inconsistent, for the Law hath its very subsistence by Peace; whence the rule is, Inter arm: silent leges, that is, The Lawes are dumbe in time of Warre; and the Prophet David tels us, that Righteousnesse and Peace have kissed each other.Psal. 35. 10 Now Righteousnesse in the Latine Translation is rondred Justitia, which is Iustice; and every man, that understands any thing, knowes that Right or Iustice is the fruit and ende of the Lawe.

And in an other place you may heare the same Prophet speaking to God himselfe,Psal. 119. 165 saying, Great Peace have they that love thy Law. So you see Law and Peace still coupled together. And through the whole Scripture I find no Warring Law, but that which the Apostle Paul speakes of, saying,Rom. 7. 12 &illegible; I see annother law in my members, warring against the Law of my minde, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sinne, which is in my members. And how good this warring law is, you may perceive by the Text. Now for Religion,Phil. 4. 9 2 Cor. 13. 1 Isa 9. 6. which is onely the service of God, the holy Scriptures will plentifully informe you, what relation and affinity that hath with Peace. For there you shall find God stiled, the God of Peace. And againe,Gal. 5. 21. 23 The God of Love and Peace. Our blessed Saviour is called, The Prince of Peace. In the Epistle to the Gallatians, it is said,Ephe. 4. 1, 2, 3. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentlenesse, goodnesse, faith, meekenesse, temperance: against such there is no law. And the same Apostle in his Epistle to the Ephesians, farther saith, I therefore the Prisoner of the Lord,Ephes. 6. 15. beseech you, that ye walke worthy of the vocation wherewith &illegible; &illegible; called:Isa. 54. 10. with all lowlinesse and weekenesse, with long suffering, forbearing one another in love, endeavouring to keepe the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace.Marth. 5. 9. And in the same Epistle, Christs Gospell is called The Gospell of Peace. God calls his Covenant, The Covenant of Peace.Psal. 29. 11. Our blessed Saviour in his Sermon upon the Mount, pronounces no small blessing on the Peacemaker. Blessed (saith he) are the Peacemakers,Prov. 12. 20. for they shall be called the children of God. And the Psalmist tells us, that The Lord will blesse his people with Peace.Mark. 9. 50. 2 Cor. 13. 11. 1 Thes. 5. 13. The wisest of men tells us, To the Counsellors of Peace is joy. How often are we commanded in the Holy Scriptures, To have Peace one with another. To live in Peace. To be at Peace among our selves.Psal. 122. 6. To pray for Peace. To love Peace. To seeke Peace and ensue it.Zach. 8. 19. &illegible; 34. 14. & 1 &illegible; 3. 2.

And is God the God of Peace? and doe they not feare his heavy judgements to bee denounced against them, and his dreadfull wrath and indignation to bee shoured downe upon them, who shall presume to Preach or Petition against a Peace? Is Christ the Prince of Peace? and can they thinke themselves his Subjects, and desire a Warre? Are the fruits of the Spirit Love and Peace? and can any man thinke himselfe moved, or inspired with the Spirit, who shall live in hatred, or oppose a Peace? Sure it must be with that lying spirit that perswaded Ahabs Propheas.1 Kin. 18. 22 Is the Gospell a Gospell of Peace? Then certainely his Religion cannot bee founded upon that Gospell, who shall not love and seeke Peace. Is Peace a blessing? Is the Peacemaker blessed? and shall hee bee called the childe of God? Accursed must he then be, and (it is to be feared) little better then the childe of the Devill, who breathes out nothing but Warre.

But some of these Botefeus, seeking to varnish over their blood-thirsty desires with a pretended inclination to peace, say, they refuse it not, so as it may be accompanied with truth. Tis well said, I wish it were as truely meant. He must be a man of a very easie credulitie that can assent to credit it; for I dare with confidence affirme, and I beleeve the whole Kingdome (besides their owne faction) will unanimously agree, that more lyes and faloities have fallen from the pennes of these kinde of men, within lesse then these two yeares, then ever were committed to the Presse, since Printing was invented.

Indeede, I thinke their desires of Peace and Truth, are equall; but let such take heede by Ananias and Saphiras judgements.Act. 9. 1. &c. And I hope this Kingdome will beware how they credit such Iesuiticall gulleries, least in stead of a pretended truth, we finde a certaine &illegible; Were such men enforced to be the &illegible; which are the greatest sticklers for this bloody warre, we had then some hopes of a happie peace, and consequently of truth, ever a better friend to peace, then warre.

We were indeede too happie in our late Peace, which made us to get our God, the giver of that blessing, and thereby justly called downe, his heavie vengeanee of a Civill Warre,Exod. 3. 8. for our ingratitude. We had then, a Land flowing with milke and honey; there was no complaining in our streetes:Psal. 144. 24. but each man sitting under the shade of his owne Vine, might without seare eat of his owne figtree, and drinke the waters of his owne cesterne.Isa. 36. 16. How richly habited were almost all rankes and degrees of people?Mat. 11. 8. In our Saviours time, those that were soft cloathing were in Kings houses: but in the time of our late peace, it was to be found almost in every pessants Cottage, silkes were the ware of every ordinary person; wee accounted him a very meane trades-man, that could not put his wife into a silke gowne and a beaver; nay, were not the wives of many Citizens of ordinary trades, habited in as rich Sattin, and bone-lace, adorned with as many orient peales, faire diamonds, and other jewels of value, as might well become a queene and yet now paradventure would gladly part with them, to be secured sustinance for themselves and families.

How munificent were we in our buildings with stately Turrets, seeming to threaten the very clouds? many of them already left dessolate without an inhabitant, and how great pitty is it to see such stately Fabrickes levelled with the ground? How did we abound in rich furniture, costly hangings, couches, bedding, and the like; massie plate, and other gallant house-hold-stuffe, already become a prey to the mercilesse souldiers, even those that pretend to fight for us. What curious gardens, brave orchards, faire meddowes, rich pastures, and fruitfull corne fields, are now ruined, defaced, and unmanured? Indeede wee did abound in all things that plenty could afford, or curiosity invent; we had health, wealth, pleasure, profit, now turned to sicknesse, penury, paine and mourning. Parents then injoyed the deare pledges of their love, their children; children their loving parents, friends and neighbours mutually happie in each others society, so that nothing was wanting to our felicity.

But this bloody tyrant Warre, hath put a period to all our joyes, all our happinesse. Monstrum horrendum informe ingens: that huge horrible, ugly Monster, Horresco referens, I tremble to speake of it. When David had committed that great sinne against the Lord in numbring the people, and as a punishment for it, was to submit to his choice of three heavie judgements, chose either Pestilence, or Famine, then that of the Sword, which he knew had no mercy.Sam 24. 14. Let us (saith he) now fall into the hand of the Lord (for his mercies are great) and let me not fall into the hands of man. Warre is one of Gods greatest Plagues, his fearefullest judgements, his heaviest scourges upon a Nation: for how ugly is the visage of it? how manifold are the miseries of it? Especially that of a civill warre, as ours is in this Kingdome.

Man, created after Gods owne image, destroying the image of his Creator; Christian most unchristianly slaughtring his brother in Christ: nay, Protestants linckt by a nearer tye of religion, massacring those of their owne Religion: the father most unnaturally ripping up the bowels of his sonne, and the sonne of the father, a brother beating out his brothers braines; kinsman against kinsman, friend against friend, most barbarously and inhumanely butchering one another: here a bullet, there a speare, or Poleax separating the soule and body in the very act of wrath and malice: the devouring Cannon heaping the mangled carcasses of horse and man together. What ghastly lookes, what hideous screckes, and dismall groanes, what grisly gaping wounds of dying men, besmeared with blood and dirt, doe even affright and terrifie the hearers and spectators, though their enemies. What out-cries, teares and sighes by new-made widdowes for their husbands deaths? What mournings by aged parents for their slaughtred sonnes? What lamentation by poore distressed children made fatherlesse by warre? What pillaging, plundrings, rapines, murders, massacres, by the cruell, barbarous, and bloody souldier? No liberty left us of ploughing, sowing, trafficking, or trading one with the other.

That with the industrious and painefull tradesman, or husbandman, hath with much labour and paines gathered together, to be the staffe and comfort of their age, and to be a portion and provision for their children, in an instant becomes the prey and spoyle of a few mercilesse men. And all these miseries usually seconded by pestilence and famine. Let us looke upon the miserable condition of Samaria, beseiged by the Syrians,2 Kings 6. 15. when by reason of the warre, the famine was so great, that an asses head was sold for fourescore pieces of silver, and the fourth part of a kabb of doves dung, for five peeces of silver. Nay women did eate their owne children, as appeares by a womans complaint to the King of Israel.verse 28. 29. And she answered, this woman sayd unto me, give thy sonne that wee may eate him to day, and we will eate my sonne to morrow, so we loyled my sonne and did eate him, and sayd unto her on the next day, give thy sonne that eve may eate him, and she hath hid her sonne.

Let us behold the miseries of Germany, a Kingdome once as famous and flourishing as ours lately was, but hath now suffered the miseries of almost 20 yeares warre: where many stately Townes and Cities have beene burnt to the ground, women ravished even in the very Churches, and after hewen in peeces: mens eares and noses cut off, and strings put through them, to make hat-bands: holes made in the legges and armes of men, and cords drawne through them, their guts pulled out at their mouthes children tost on the points of speares; and so great hath the famine beene in some part thereof, that the people have beene glad to eate dogges, cats, dead men, and all manner of carrion for foode.

Nay let us goe no further then bleeding Ireland, (which now suffers for our distraction here) and we shall finde their miseries not behinde those of Germany, where after they had beaten out the husbands braines, they ravished the wife, and then ripping her up being with childe, cast the childe into the fire: ravishing maides and women before their parents and husbands faces: driving men and women naked out of their houses into the frost and snow, where hundreds of them have perished with cold and famine, hanging some, and with most exquisite tortures, mangling, gashing, and miserably tormenting others, without all sence of humanitie. And God Almighty knowes how soone it may bee our turnes to suffer the like, or worse calamities, unlesse we endeavour to prevent it, by applying all our diligence, industry, and affections towards the procuring of a Peace, while it may bee had. The long continued warre in Germany shewes us, Peace is not easie to be obtained, when a smaller Army then ours, on either side, hath beene for many yeares together attempted to be removed, but without successe. Neither doth God alwayes blesse either the greater or the better side with victory. For we have many examples in Scripture where great Armies have beene overcome with smaller numbers: and our Saviour himselfe tells you,Luke 13. 1, 2, 3, 4. that the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices, were not sinners above all the Galileans, because they suffered such things; nor those 18. upon whom the tower of &illegible; and slue, sinners above all men that dwelt in Ierusalem: which shewes they are not always the greatest sinners, whom God suffers to perish here. Let us therefore use all possible endeavours for a peace, and for prevention of farther shedding of blood; least by lamentable experience we finde ourselves included within that heavie judgement pronounced by our Saviour,Mat. 26. 52. which is, that All they that take the sword shall perish with the swerd.

FINIS.

 


8.13. Anon., The Actors Remonstrance (24 January, 1643)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., THE ACTORS REMONSTRANCE, OR COMPLAINT: FOR The silencing of their profession, and ba|nishment from their severall Play houses. In which is fully set downe their grievan|ces, for their restraint; especially since Stage-playes, only of all publike recreations are pro|hibited; the exercise at the Beares Colledge, and the motions of Pup|pets being still in force and vigour. As it was presented in the names and behalfes of all our London Comedians to the great God PHOEBUS-APOLLO, and the nine Heliconian Sisters, on the top of PERNASSUS, by one of the Masters of Re|quests to the MUSES, for this present month. And published by their command in print by the Typo|graph Royall of the Castalian Province. 1643.
LONDON, Printed for EDW. NICKSON. Ianuar. 24. 1643.

Estimated date of publication

24 January, 1643.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 225; Thomason E. 86. (8.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Actors Remonstrance or Complaint, for the silencing of their Profession, and banishment from their severall PLAY-HOUSES.

OPpressed with many calamities, and languishing to death under the burthen of a long and (for ought wee know) an everlasting restraint, we the Comedians, Tragedians and Actors of all sorts and sizes belonging to the famous private and publike Houses within the City of London and the Suburbs thereof, to you great Phœbus, and you sacred Sisters, the sole Patronesles of our distressed Calling, doe we in all humility present this our humble and lamentable complaint, by whose intercession to those powers who confined us to silence, wee hope to be restored to our pristine honour and imployment.

First, it is not unknowne to all the audience that have frequented the private Houses of Black-Friers, the Cock-Pit and Salisbury-Court, without austerity, wee have purged our Stages from all obscene and scurrilous iests; such as might either be guilty of corrupting the manners, or defaming the persons of any men of note in the City or Kingdome; that wee have endevoured, as much as in us lies, to instruct &illegible; another in the true and genuine Art of acting, to represse be &illegible; and raising, formerly in great request, and for to &illegible; our language and action to the more gentle and naturall garbe of the times; that we have left off for our owne parts, and so have commanded our servarits, to forget that ancient custome, which formerly rendred men of our quality infamous, namely, the inveigling in young Gentlemen, Merchants Factors, and Prentizes to spend their patrimonies and Masters estates upon us and our Harlots in Tavernes; we have cleane and quite given over the borrowing money at first sight of punie gallants, or praising their swords, belts and beavers, so to invite them to bestow them upon us; and to our praise be it spoken, we were for the most part very well reformed, few of us keeping, or being rather kept by our Mistresses, betooke our selves wholy to our wives; observing the matrimoniall vow of chastity, yet for all these conformities and reformations, wee were by authority (to which wee in all humility submit) restrained from the practice of our Profession; that Profession which had before maintained us in comely and convenient Equipage; some of us by it meerely being inabled to keepe Horses (though not Whores) is now condemned to a perpetuall, at least a very long temporary silence, and wee left to live upon our shifts, or the expence of our former gettings, to the great impoverishment and utter undoing of our selves, wives, children, and dependants; besides which, is of all other our extremest grievance, that Playes being put downe under the name of publike recreations; other publike recreations of farre more harmfull consequence permitted, still to stand in statu quo prius, namely, that Nurse of barbarisme and beastlinesse, the Beare-Garden, whereupon their usuall dayes those Demy-Monsters, are baited by bandogs, the Gentlemen of Stave and Taile, namely, boystrous Butchers, cutting Coblers, hard-handed Masons and the like, rioting companions, resorting thither with as much freedome as formerly, making with their sweat and crowding, a farre worse stinck than the ill formed Beasts they persecute with their dogs and whips, Pick-pockets, which in an age are not heard of in any of our Houses, repairing thither, and other disturbers of the publike peace, which dare not be seen in our civill and well-governed Theatres, where none use to come but the best of the Nobility and Gentry; and though some have taxed our Houses unjustly for being the receptacles of Harlots, the exchanges where they meet and make their bargaines with their tranck chapmen of the Country and City, yet we may justly excuse our selves of either knowledge or consent in these lewd practices, we having no propheticke soules to know womens honesty by instinct, nor commission to examine them; and if we had, worthy were these wretches of Bridewell, that out of their owne mouthes would convince themselves of lasciviousnesse: Puppit-plays, which are not so much valuable as the very musique betweene each Act at ours, are still up with uncontrolled allowance, witnesse the famous motion of Bell and the Dragon, so frequently visited at Holbourne-bridge; these passed Christmas Holidayes, whither Citizens of all sorts repaire with far more detriment to themselves then ever did to Playes, Comedies and Tragedies being the lively representations of mens actions, in which, vice is alwayes sharply glanced at, and punished, and vertue rewarded and encouraged; the most exact and naturall eloquence of our English language expressed and daily amplified; and yet for all this, we suffer, and are inforced, our selves and our dependants, to tender our complaint in dolefull manner to you great Phœbus, and you inspired Heliconian Virgins: First our House-keepers, that grew wealthy by our endevours, complaine that they are enforced to pay the grand Land-lords rents, during this long Vacation, out of their former gettings; instead of ten, twenty, nay, thirty shillings shares which used nightly to adorne and comfort with their harmonious musique, their large and well-stuffed pockets, they have shares in nothing with us now but our mis-fortunes; living meerly out of the stock, out of the interest and principall of their former gotten moneyes, which daily is exhausted by the maintenance of themselves and families.

For our selves, such as were sharers, are so impoverished, that were it not for some slender helps afforded us in this time of calamitie, by our former providence, we might be enforced to act our Tragedies: our Hired-men are disperst, some turned Souldiers and Trumpetters, others destin’d to meaner courses, or depending upon us, whom in courtesie wee cannot see want, for old acquaintance sakes. Their friends, young Gentlemen, that used to feast and frolick with them at Tavernes, having either quitted the kin in these times of distraction, or their money having quitted them, they are ashamed to look upon their old expensive friends. Nay, their verie Mistresses, those Buxsome and Bountifull Lasses, that usually were enamoured on the persons of the younger sort of Actors, for the good cloaths they wore upon the stage, beleeving them really to be the persons they did only represent, and quite out of sorts themselves, and so disabled for supplying their poore friends necessities. Our Fooles, who had wont to allure and excite laughter with their very countenances, at their first appearance on the stage (hard shifts are better than none) are enforced, some of them at least to maintaine themselves, by vertue of their bables. Our boyes, ere wee shall have libertie to act againe, will be growne out of use like crackt organ-pipes, and have faces as old as our flags.

Nay, our very Doore-keepers, men and women, most grievously complaine, that by this cessation they are robbed of the priviledge of stealing from us with licence: they cannot now, as in King Agamemnons dayes, seeme to scratch their heads where they itch not, and drop shillings and half Crowne-pieces in at their collars. Our Musike that was held so delectable and precious, that they scorned to come to a Taverne under twentie shillings salary for two houres, now wander with their Instruments under their cloaks, I meant such as have any, into all houses of good fellowship, saluting every roome where there is company, with Will you have any musike Gentlemen? For our Tire-men, and others that belonged formerly to our ward-robe, with the rest, they are out of service: our stock of cloaths, such as are not in tribulation for the generall use, being a sacrifice to moths. The Tobacco-men, that used to walk up and downe, selling for a penny pipe, that which was not worth twelve-pence an horse-load; Being now bound under Tapsters in Inns and Tippling houses. Nay such a terrible distresse and dissolution hath befallen us, and all those that had dependance on the stage, that it hath quite unmade our hopes of future recoverie. For some of our ablest ordinarie Poets, in stead of their annuall stipends and beneficiall second-dayes, being for meere necessitie compelled to get a living by writing contemptible penny-pamphlets, in which they have not so much as poetical licence to use any attribute of their profession; but that of Quidlibet audendi? and faining miraculous stories, and relations of unheard of battels. Nay, it is to be feared, that shortly some of them; (if they have not been enforced to do it already) will be encited to enter themselves into Martin Parkers societie, and write ballads. And what a shame this is, great Phœbus, and you sacred Sisters; for your owne Priests thus to be degraded of their ancient dignities. Be your selves righteous Judges, when those who formerly have sung with such elegance the acts of Kings and Potentates, charming like Orphens the dull and brutish multitude, scarce a degree above stones and forrests into admiration, though not into understanding with their divine raptures, shall be by that tyrant Necessitie reduced to such abject exigents, wandring like grand children of old Erra Paters, those learned Almanack-makers, without any Mæcenas to cherish their loftie conceptions, prostituted by the mis-fortune of our silence, to inexplicable miseries, having no heavenly Castalian Sack to actuate and informe their spirits almost confounded with stupiditie and coldnesse, by their frequent drinking (and glad too they gan get it) of fulsome Ale, and hereticall Beere, as their usuall beverage.

To conclude, this our humble complaint great Phœbus, and you nine sacred Sisters, the Patronesses of Wit, and Pro tectresses of us poore disrepected Comedians, if for the present, by your powerfull intercessions we may be re-invested in our former Houses, and setled in our former Calling, we shall for the future promise, never to admit into our six-penny-roomes those unwholesome inticing Harlots, that sit there meerely to be taken up by Prentizes or Lawyers Clerks; nor any female of what degree soever, except they come lawfully with their husbands, or neere allies: the abuses in Tobacco shall be reformed, none vended, not so much as in three-penny galleries, unlesse of the pure Spanish leafe. For ribaldry, or any such paltry stuffe, as may scandall the pious, and provoke the wicked to loosenesse, we will utterly expell it with the bawdy and ungracious Poets, the authors to the Antiodes. Finally, we shall hereafter so demeane our selves as none shall esteeme us of the ungodly, or have cause to repine at our action or interludes: we will not entertaine any Comedian that shall speake his part in a tone, as if hee did it in derision of some of the pious, but reforme all our disorders, and amend all our amisses, so prosper us Phœbus and the nine Muses, and be propitious to this our complaint.

FINIS.

 


8.14. Anon., Touching the Fundamentall Lawes of this Kingdome (24 February, 1643)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., Touching the Fundamentall Lawes, Or Politique Constitution of this Kingdome, The KINGS Negative Voice, and The Power of PARLIAMENTS. To which is annexed, The priviledge and power of the Parlia|ment touching The MILITIA.
LONDON Printed for Thomas Underhill, and are to be sold at the signe of the Bible in Woodstreet. M.DC.XLIII.

Estimated date of publication

24 Februarty, 1643.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 237; Thomason E. 90 (21.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

TOUCHING FVNDAMENTALL LAVVS, AND The Kings Negative Voice.

FUndamentall Laws are not (or at least need not be) any written agreement like Peare-Stones between King and People, the King himselfe being a part (not party) in those Laws, and the Common-wealth not being like a Corporation treated by Charter, but treating it selfe. But the fundamentall Law or Laws is a setling of the laws of nature and common equity (by common consent) in such a forme of Polity and Government, as that they may be administred amongst us with honour and safety. For the first of which therefore, we are governed by a King: and for the second, by a Parliament, to oversee and take order that that honourable trust that is put into the hands of the King for the dignity of the Kingdome, be rightly executed, and not abused to the alteration of the Politique Constitution taken up and approved, or to the destruction of that, for whose preservation it was ordered and intended. A principall part of which honour, is that royall assent he is to give for the enacting of such good Laws as the people shal choose, for they are first to consult their own safety and welfare, and then he who is to be intrusted with it, is to give an honourable confirmation to it, and so to put an Impresse of Majesty and Royall authority upon it.

Fundamentall Laws then are not things of capitulation between King and people, as if they were forrainers and Strangers one to another, (nor ought they or any other Laws so to be, for then the King should governe for himselfe, not for his people) but they are things of constitution, treating such a relation, and giving such an existence and being by an externall polity to King and Subjects, as Head and Members, which constitution in the very being of it is a Law held forth with more evidence, and written in the very heart of the Republique, farre firmlyer then can be by pen and paper, and in which sense we owe our Allegiance to the King as Head, (not onely by power, but insuence) and so part of the constitution, not as a party capitulating for a prerogative against or contrary to it, which whosoever sake to set up, or sine unith, doe brealt their Allegiance, and rebell against the State, going about to deprive the King of his juridicall and lawfull authority, conferred upon him by the constitution of this State, under the pretence of investing him with an illegall and unconstitutive power, whereupon may follow this grand inconvenience, The withdrawment of His peoples Allegiance, which, as a Body connexed with the Head by the constitution of this Kingdome, is owing to him; his person in relation to the body, as the enlivening and quickning head thereof, being sacred and taken notice of by the laws in that capacity, and under that notion us made inviolate.

And if it be conceived that Fundamentall Laws must needs be only extant in uniting, this is the next way to bring all to consusion, for then by the same rule the King bids the Parliament produce those laws that fundamentally give them their being, priviledges & power, (Which by the way is not like the power of inferiour Courts, that are springs of the Parliament, dealing betweene party and party, but is answerable to their trust, this Court being it selfe Fundamentall and Paramount, comprehending Law and Equity, and being intrusted by the whole for the whole, is not therefore to be circumscribed by any other Laws which have their being from it, not it from them, but onely by that Law which at first gave it its being, to wit, Salus populi) By the same rule I say the Parliament may also intreat the King to produce those Laws that Fundamentally give him his being, power and honour. Both which must therefore be determined, not by laws, for they themselves are laws, yea the most supreame and fundamentall law, giving law to laws themselves but by the received constitution or polity, which they themselves are; and the end of their constitution is the Law or rule of their power, to wit, An honourable and safe Regiment of the Common-wealth, which two whosoever goeth about to divide the one of them front the other, breaks the fundamentall constitutive law or laws and polity of this kingdome, that ordinance of man which we are to submit unto; nor can or ought any statute or written law whatsoever, which is of later Edition and inferiour Condition, being but an off-spring of this root, be interpreted or brought in Plea, against this primary and raticall constitution, without guilt of the highest I reason and destructive enmity to the Publique weale and polity, because by the very constitution of this Kingdome, all laws or utterpretation of laws tending to confusion or dissolution, are ipso facto void. In this case we may allude and say, That the Covenant which was 400. peers before the Law, an after-Act cannot disanull it.

Ob. It may be objected, that this discourse seems to make our Government to be founded in Equity, not in Law, or upon that common rule of Salus popali, which is alike common to all Nations, as well as any: and so what difference:

Ans. The Fundamentall laws of England are nothing but the Common laws of Equity and Nature reduced into a particular way of policy, which policy is the ground of our title to them, and interest in them: For though it is true, that Nature hath invested all Nations in an equall right to the laws of Nature and Equity by a common bounty, without respect of persons, yet the severall models of externall Government and Politie renders them more or lesse capable of this their common right: For though they have an equall right in Nature to all the Laws of Nature and Equity, yet having fundamentally subjected themselves by their politique Constitutions unto a Regal servitude, by Barbarisme or the like they have thereby much disabled and bisbested themselves of that common benefit. But on the contrary, where the outward constitution or polity of a Republick is purposely framed for the confirming and better conserving this common right of Nature and Equity, (as in ours) there is not onely a common right, but also a particular and lawfull power joyned with this right for its maintenance and supportation. For whereas other people are without all supreame power, either of making laws or raising monies, both these bodies of supremacie being in the arbitrary hands onely of the Soveraigne Magistrate amongst many Nations, these with us are in the hands of the supreame Government, (not Governour) or Court of Judicature, to &illegible; it, the King and Parliament; here the people (like free-men) give money to the King, he both not take it; and offers Laws to be enacted, doth not receive them so: Now in such a constituted Kingdome, where the very Constitution its selfe is the fundamentall law of its owne preservation, as is this mixt Regiment of ours, consisting of King and Parliament, as Head and Body, comprehending Monarchie, Aristocracie, and Democracie; there the fundamentall laws are like fundamentall truths in these two properties: First, they are comprehended in a very little &illegible; to but, honour and safety; and secondly, they have their influence into all other inferiour Laws which are to be subjected to them, &illegible; correspondent with them, as lawful children and naturall branches.

Ob. But in processe of time there are many written Laws which form at least to contradict this fundamentall Constitution, and are not they binding notwithstanding it?

Ans. The Constitution of this Kingdome which gave it its being, and which is the radicall and fundamentall law thereof, ought therefore to command in chiefe, for that it never &illegible; up its authority to those inferiour laws, which have their being from it, nor ought they which spring from it tend to the destruction of it, but on the contrary, it is to revive its radicall virtue and influence into all succeeding laws, and they like branches are to make the &illegible; &illegible; from whence they spring, with exhibiting the lively and sructifying virtue thereof, according to the nature and seasons of succeeding times; things incident in after ages not being able to be &illegible; and particularly provided for at the beginning, saving in the fundamentall law of &illegible; populi, politiquely established; nor can any laws growing out of that root, bear any other fruit, then such as the nature thereof &illegible; for, for a particular branch to ruine the whole foundation by a seeming sense contrary to it, or differing from it, is very absurd; for then how can it be said, Thou bearest not the root, but the root thee: Laws must alwayes relish of, and drink in the constitution or polity where they are made; and therefore with us, the laws wherein the King is nominated, and so seems to put an absolute authority into his hands, must never so be construed, for that were with a breath to blow downe all the building at once: but the King is there &illegible; and meant under a two-fold notion; First, as trusted, being the &illegible; with that power the Law conferd upon him, for a Legall, and not an absolute purpose, tending to an honourable preservation, not an unnaturall dissolution. Secondly, as meaning him juridically, not abstractly or personally, for so onely the Law takes notice of the King as a surivicall person; for till the Legislative power be absolutely in the King, so that laws come down from him to his people, and goe not up from them to him, they must ever be so interpreted: for as they have a juridicall being and beginning, to wit, in Parliament, so must they have a sutable erecution and administration, to wit, by the Courts, and legall Ministers, under the Kings authority, which according to the constitution of this Kingdome, he can no more suspend for the good of his people, then the Courts can theirs; or if he doe, to the publique hazard, then have the Courts this advantage, that for publique presernation they may and must provide upon that principle, The King can doe no wrong, neither in withholding justice, nor protection from his people. So that then Salus populi being so principally respected and provided for, according to the nature of our constitution and polity, &illegible; so being Lex legum, or the rule of all laws branching thence, Then if any law doe by variation of times, violence of tyrannie, or misprision of Interpretere, bary there-from, it is a bastard, and not a son, and is by the lawful parents either to be reduced or cast out, as gendring unto bondage and ruine of the inheritance, by attempting to erect an absolute and arbitrary Government. Nor can this equitable exposition of particular Statutes taken from the scope of the politique constitution be denyed without overthrow of just and legal Monarchy, (which ever tends to publique good and preservation) and the setting up of an unjust and illegall tyrannie, ruling, if not without law, yet by abused laws, turning them as conquered ordnance upon the people. The very Scripture it selfe must borrow from its scope and principles for explantation of particular places, else it will be abused (as it is through that default) unto Heresies. See we not how &illegible; Satan quoted true Scripture to Christ when he tempted him, onely by urging the letter without the equity, or true intention and meaning? We are to know and doe things verum verè, justum justè, &illegible; we neither judge with righteous judgement, nor obey with just obedience.

Ob. But is not the Parliament guilty of evercising an arbitrary power, if their proceedings be not regulated by written laws, but by &illegible; populi?

Ans. For the Parliament to be bound up by written laws, is both destructive and absurd.

First, it is destructive, it being the Fundamental Court and Law, or the very Salus populi of England, and ordained, as to make laws, and see them executed, so to supply their deficiencie according to the present erigencie of things for publique preservation by the prerogative of ‘alus populi, which is universally in them, and but particularly in particular laws and statutes, which cannot provide against all future exigents, which the law of Parliaments both, and therefore are not they to be limits to this. And it would yet he further destructive, by &illegible; the Parliament short of half its power at once, for it being a Court both of Law and Equity (as appears by the power of making laws, which is nothing but Equity reduced by common consent into &illegible;) when ever it is cricumscribed by written laws, (which onely to the property of inferiour Courts) it ceaseth to be supreame, and &illegible; itselfe of that inherent and uncircumscribed power which Salus populi comprehends.

Secondly, as it is destructive, so also it is absurd; for the Legislative power which gives laws, is not to receive laws, saving from the nature and end of its owne constitution, which as they give it a being, so they &illegible; it with Laws of preservation both of it selfe; the whole, which it represents.

I would not herein be misunderstood, as if the Parliament, when &illegible; onely both the office of inferiour Courts, judging between party a party, were not limited by written lawes: there I grant it is, because therein it only deales between meum & tuunt, which particular written lawes can and ought to determin: so that its superlative and uncircumscribed power I intend only as relating to the Universe and the affaires thereof, wherein it is to walke by its fundamentall principles, not by particular precepts or Statutes, which are made by the Parliament, between King and people, not between people and Parliament: they are &illegible; to be rules of Government to the King, agreeing with the liberty and property of the people, and rules of Obedience to the people without defainment of their freedome by the exercise of an illegall, usurped, and unconsented power, whereunto Kings (espectally in hereditary Monarchies) are very prone, which cannot be suspected by a Parliament, which is representatively the Publike, intrusted for it, & which is like to partake and share with the Publick, being but so many private men put into authority &illegible; by common consent, for common good.

Nor is the Parliament hereby guilty of an Arbitrary Government, or is it destruct be to the Petition of Right, when as in providing for publick weale, it observes not the letter of the law; first, because as aforesaid, that law was not made betweene Parliament and people, but by the people in Parliament betweene the King and them, as appears by the whole tenour of it, both in the complaining and praying parts, which wholly relate to the King. Secondly, because of the common consent, that in the representative Body (the Parliament) is given thereunto, wherein England in her Polity imitates Nature in her Instincts, who is wont to violate particular principles for publique preservation, as when light things descend, and heavy ascend, to prevent a vacuum: and thirdly, because of the equitable power which is inherent in a Parliament, and for publique good is to be acted above and against any particular Statute, or all of them: and fourthly, because the end of making that Law, to wit, the publique preservation, is &illegible; in the breaking of it, which is lawfull in a Parliament that is chosen by the whole for the whole, and are themselves also of the body, though not in a king, for therein the Law saith, Better a mischeife then an &illegible; But it may be objected, though it be not &illegible; for the Parliament to doe against written law, yet is it not so when they go against the Kings consent, which the law, even the fundamentall law, supposeth in Parliamentary proceedings; This hath beene answered, that the King is juridically and according to the intention of the law in his Courts, so that what the Parliament consults for the publick good, That by oath, and the duty of his office, and nature of this polity he is to consent unto, and in case he do deny it, yet in the construction of the fundamentall law and constitution of this Kingdom, he is conceived to grant it, inprosing the head not to be so unnaturall to the body that hath chosen it for good and not for evill.

But it will be answered, where is the Kings Negative Voice if the Parliament may proceed without his consent; I answer. That there is no known nor written law that gives him any; and things of that nature are willingly beleeved till they be abused, &illegible; with too much violence claimed. That his Majesty hath fundamentally a right of consent to the &illegible; of laws is true, which (as aforesaid) is part of that honourable trust constituted in him: And that this royall ascent is an act of honoer and not of absolute and negative power opprorogative, appeares by these following reasons.

First, by his oath at the Coronation mentioned in one of the Parliaments Declarations where he both or should sweare to confirme and grant all such good lawes as his people shall choose to be observed, not hath chosen, for first, The word concedis in that oath were them unnecessary, the lawes formerly enacted being allready granted by foregoing Kings, and so they need no more concession as or else we must run upon this shelfe that all our laws die with the old King, and receive their being a new, by the new Kings consent. Secondly, Hereby the first and second clause in that interrogatory viz. Concedis iustas leges & permittas protegendas, are confounded and doe but idem repetere; Thirdly, Quas vulgus elegerit implies onely the act of the people in a disfunctive sence from the act or consent of the King, but laws allready made have more then quas vulgus elegerit, they have also the royall consent too, so that that phrase cannot meane them wherein the act or consent of the King is allready involved.

Secondly, by the practise of &illegible; the royall ascent even unto those very acts of subsidies which are granted to himselfe and for his owne use, which it is supposed he will accept of, and yet Honoris gratia is his roiall ascent craved and contributed thereunto.

Thirdly, by the Kings not sitting in Parliament to debate and consult lawes, nor are they at all offered him by the Parliament to consider of, but to consent to, which yet are transmitted from one house to another, as well to consult as consent to, shewing thereby he hath no part in the consultory part of them (for that it belongs onely to the people in Parliament to discerne and consult their own good,) but he comes onely at the time of enaging, bringing his Royall Authority with him, as it were to set the seale thereof to the Inventure allready prepared by the people, for the King is head of the Parliament in regard of his authority, not in regard of his reason or judgement, as if it were to be opposed to the reason or judgement of both houses (which is the reason both of King and Kingdome) and therefore do they as consult so also interpret lawes without him, supposing him to be a person replenished with honour and royall authority not skilled in lawes, nor to receive information either of law or councell in Parliamentary affaires from any, saving from that supreame court and highest councell of the King and Kingdome, which admits no counterpoint, being intrusted both as the wisest Councell and justest judicature.

Fourthly, either the choise of the people in Parliament is to be the ground and rule of the Kings assent, or nothing but his pleasure, and so all Bills though never so necessary for publique good and preservation, and after never so much paines and consultation of both houses may be rejected, and so they made meere cyphers, and we brought to that passe, as either to have no lawes, or such onely as come immediately from the King (who oft is a man of pleasure, and little &illegible; publicke affaires, to be able to judge) and so the Kingdomes great councell must be subordinated either to his meere will, and then what difference between a free Monarchy, and an absolute, saving that the one rules without Councell, and the other against it, or at the best but to a cabinet councell consisting commonly of men of private interests, but certainly of no publicke trust.

Ob. But if the King must consent to such laws as the Parliament shall chuse to nomine, they may then propound unreasonable things to him, as to consent to his own deposing, or to the lessiting his own revenew, it.

Ans. So that the issue is, whether it be fitter to trust the without and integrity of our Parliament, or the will and pleasure of the King in this case of so great and publicke concernment. In a &illegible; the king being made the fountaine of justice and protection to his people by the fundementall lawes or constitution of this Kingdome, he is therefore to give life to such acts and things as tend thereunto, which acts depend not upon his pleasure, but though they are to receive their greater vigour from him, yet are they not to be suspended at pleasure by him, for that which at first was intended by the kingdome: for an honourable way of subsistence and administration must not be wrested contrary to the nature of this Polity, (which is a free and mirt Monarchy and not an absolute) to its destruction and confusion, so that in case the King in his person should decline his duty, the king in his courts are bound to performe it, where his authority properly refines, for if he refuse that honour which the republicke by its fundamentall constitution hath conferred upon him, and will not put forth the ads of it, for the end it was given him, viz. for the justice and safety of his people, this hinders not but that they who have as fundamentally reserved a power of being wellbeing in their own handes by the concurrence of Parliamentary authority to the royall dignity, may thereby provide for their own subsistence, wherein is acted the kings juridicall authority though his personall pleasure be withheld, for his legall and juridicall power is included and supposed in the very being, and consequently in the acts of Courts of justice, whose being he may as well suspend as their power of acting, for that without this is but a cypher, and therefore neither their being nor their acting so depend upon him, as not to be able to act and execute common justice and protection without him, in case he deny to act with them, and yet both so depend upon him, is that he is bound both in duty and honour, by the constitution of this polity to act in them and they from him, so that (according to that ariome in law) the King can doe no wrong, because his iuridicall power and authority is allwayes to controle his personall unscarriages.

Se Defendendo.

GOd and nature hath ordained Government for the preservation of the governed. This is a truth so undeniable, as that none will gain-say it, saving in practice, which therefore being taken for granted, it must needs follow that to what end Government was ordained, it must bee maintained, for that it is not in the power of particular persons or communities of men to depart with selfe preservation by any covenant whatsoever, nor ought it to bee exacted by any superiours from their inferiours, either by oath or edict, because neither oathes nor statutes are obligatory further then they agree with the righteous Laws of God and nature; further then so they ought neither to be made nor kept.

Let it be supposed then for argument sake, that the Militia of the Kingdom, is in the power of the King, yet now as the case stands it is lawfull for the Parliament to reassume it, because though they passed it into his hands, for the peoples preservation, yet it was never intended that by it he might compasse their destruction, contrary to the Law of nature; whereby every man, yea every thing is bound to preserve it selfe. And thus much in effect is confessed at unawares, by the Author of the Reply to the Answer of the London Petition: who affirmeth, saying The King is invested with the sole power of Training, Arraying, and Mastering, and then gives the reason, because it is most consonant to reason, as well as grounded on Law, That he wich is bound to protect, should be able to compasse that end. Which reason overthrows both his position and intention. 1. His position, for this is no reason why the sole power of the Militia should be in the hands of the King; because he is bound to protect, except he were bound solely to protect, that is, without the counsel and advice of Parliament: but it hath beene resolved that He is not sole judge of necessity, and therefore not sole protector against it, but together with His Parliament, who consequently shares in the power of the Militia. 2. It overthrows His intention, which is so to put the power of the Militia into the hands of the King, as to enable him to do what he wil with it, when as yet he himself cannot but affirm, it is his to protect withall, for hat when he ceaseth to use it to its end, it ceaseth to be in his power for else let the man speake plain, and say, it is His to destroy as well as to protect.

Ob. But the Militia is passed to the King, absolutely without any condition of revocation expressed, or of limitation to circumscribe the use whereunto it ought to be imployed.

1. Ans. Laws of God and nature, neither are nor need to be expressed in contracts or edicts, for they are ever supposed to be supreme to humane ordinances, and to chalenge obedience in the first place, and other Laws so far onely as they are consonant to them, though these Laws be further backed with Oathes and Protestations: As for instance, I give a man a sword, and sweare I will never take it from him; yet if he actually assault me, or it manifestly appeare he intends to cut my throat, or take my purse with it, I may lawfully possesse my selfe of it again if opportunity serve, because in such agreements betwixt man & man, the laws of nature neither are nor can be exempted, but are necessarily implyed, still to be of force, because no bonds can lawfully invalid them, and id solum possumus quod jure possumus. But it may be asked how it appeares that the King intends to imploy the Militia to the destruction of his people. Why first because He hath refused to hearken to the wholsome counsel of His Parliament, the representative body, and the highest Court and Counsel of the Kingdom. 2 Because, è contrario, he hearkens to the councels of notorious Papists and Malignants, men engaged against the publike good and welfare of this Kingdome, in a diametrall opposition, so that if they perish it prospereth, and if it prosper they perish. 3. Because &illegible; hath had a deepe hand in contriving and plotting the ruine and extirpation of the Parliament, by secret and open violence, and in them of the whole Kingdome of whom they are the Epitome, and as the King is the head, so they are the heart. But further it may be replied, that the King hath promised to maintain Parliaments and governe by Law. Ans. That is so far as he knowes his own heart, and as he can be master of himselfe: He sware the same at His Coronation and promised as much when he granted the Petition of Right, but how they have beene kept God knowes, and we are not ignorant. It may be His Majesty may meane as he speakes, but 1. Temptations may change his minde, as it hath done too often and as it did his that said to the Prophet, Is thy servant a dog that he should do such things? and yet did them. The welfare of Kingdomes is not to be founded upon bare spontaneous promises, but reall contracts. 2. He himselfe sayes, he himselfe is not skild in the Laws, and we have found it true, so that he must take information of them fro some body from his Parliament (that is his people that made them) he wil not, and are any sitter to be Judges of the Law, then the highest Court; if they may be Judges that are delinquents to the Law, and Malignants against it, and have beene grievous oppressors of the People, even against the known Laws (so much cried up) we are like to have just Judges and righteous Lawyers.

2. Ans. If the Militia be so absolutely the Kings, as that all power of defence and preservation of our selves and our rights be taken from us, to what purpose do we strive for liberty & property, and laws to confirm them? these are but imaginary things, if they have no hedge to fence them; If the Militia be for the King, let us burne the Statutes we have already, and save a labour of making more. No man would thinke it a good purchase to buy land, and when he hath paid his money to have it in the power of the seller, to take it from him by his sword.

Ob. It is true that Kings are tied by oath, and legall contracts, to governe by Laws, and to maintain liberty and property to their people, which puts them under an obligation of conscience to God, so that they are responsible to him for the breach of fidelity and duty, but not to the people who may minde them of their duty, but not compell them to it.

Ans. This Objection hath two parts, First, That Kings are onely responsible to God. 2. That Subjects must suffer, wrong, but not by force maintain their right. To the first I answer. That if Kings be solely answerable to God, then contracts are in vaine, for they shall answer for all their arbitrary and unjust tyrannie over their people, though there were no contracts. That which makes us happier then other Nations, sure is not this, that the King for the breach of his duty hath more to answer at the day of judgement then other Kings have, if that bee all wee have small cause to joy in our priviledges, they are neither worth the blood that hath been shed for them, nor the money that hath beene paid for them. Secondly, Government must be considered under a twofold notion, divine and humane. The Genus which is government it selfe is divine, so that people are absolutely bound to have government, but not bound to have an absolute government, for the species or the modus gubernandi is humane, and therefore the Apostle sayes, Be subject to every ordinance of man, that is, to every such kinde of Government as your lot falls to be under, by the constitution of the Common-wealth you live in. Now Government being thus of a mixt nature, the Ordinance both of God and man it is not onely subject to God but also to men, to be regulated, amended, and maintained by the people: for as it is Gods Ordinance for their good, so doth he give them liberty to provide it bee not abused to their hurt, so that when God shall put an opportunity into their hands, they ought to improve it to the setting of government up right, or the keeping of it so from apparent violations. There was a time when both Government and the manner of governing belonged to God, to wit, amongst the Israelites, for to that people he was both a God of moralls and politiks, and therefore he tooke it so ill for them to usurpe upon his right, as to desire to change their government from Judges to Kings, but this was a peculiar right he assumed over that particular people onely. To the second I answer thus. Every Subject taken divisim, and apart from the whole, is to suffer under abused authority, and to obey passively, rather then to breake union or cause confusion, but no Subject is bound to suffer by that which is not authority, as is the will of the Magistrate: If a Court of Justice should unjustly condemne a man, he is patiently to undergoe it, but if a Judge or the King himselfe should violently set upon him to kill him, he may defend himselfe; for the Ordinance of God and man both, is affixed to the office, and not unto the person, to the authority and not unto the will, so that the person acting out of office, and by his will may be resisted, though the ordinance may not. But the representative body of the Common-wealth, (which is all men conjunctim) they may not onely oppose the person and his will, but even the office and authority it selfe when abused, and are bound to it both in conscience to God when he gives them opportunity, and in discharging of their trust to them that imployed them. For first God calls to have the wicked removed from the Throne, and whom doth he call upon to doe it but upon the people (in case the King will not) or their trustees, for as hehath originally founded all authority in the people, so he expects a discharge of it from them for his glory, & the publike weale, which are the ends of Government, from which God and nature hath ordained it. Secondly, In discharge of their trust for the whole, for order sake, making them their representative actors, and putting that universall and popular authority, that is in the body of the people, and which (for the publike good and preservation) is above every man and all Laws, into their hands, they may expect and chalenge them by vertue of their stewardship, to provide for their safety and well being, against whomsoever shall oppose it, no one being above all, and therefore ought not that universall power, which by way of trust is conveyed over to the Parliament be betrayed into the hands of any by admitting or allowing any authority to be superiour, by tollerating abuses and usurpations, as if they had not power to regulate them.

FINIS.

 


8.15. Anon., Briefe Collections out of Magna Charta (19 May, 1643)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., Briefe Collections OUT OF Magna Charta: OR, The Knowne good old LAWES OF ENGLAND. Which sheweth; That the Law is the highest Inheritance the King hath; and that if His Charter, Grant, or Pattent, be repugnant to the said Lawes, and Statutes, cannot be good, as is instanced in the Charter of Bridewell, London, and others. By which it appeares; That the King by His Charter may not alter the Nature of the Law, the Forme of a Court; nor Inheritance lineally to descend; nor that any Subject be protected from Arrests, Suites, &c.
Printed at London, for George Lindsey, and are to be sould at his Shop over against London-stone. 1643.

Estimated date of publication

19 May, 1643.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 260; Thomason E. 102 (11.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

Collections out of MAGNA CHARTA: OR, The knowne good old Lawes of ENGLAND.

Magnalia Regni, 19. H. 6.INter Magnalia Regni; Amongst the greatest and most haughty things of this Kingdome; as it is affirmed in the 19. H. 6. Le ley est le pluis hault. Inheritance q. le Roy ad, &c. That is; the Law is the highest Inheritance that the King hath.

For by the Law both the King and all his Subjects are ruled and directed.

The Maximes to direct the King.The Maximes and Rules whereby the King is directed, are the ancient Maximes and Customes, and States of this Land.

The Maximes.The Maximes are the foundations of the Law, and the full and perfect Conclusions of reason.

The Customes of the Realm.The Customes of the Realme, are properly such things, as through much, often, and long vsage: either of simplicitie, or ignorance, getting once an Entrie; are entred and hardned by Succession, and after be defended as firme and stable Lawes.

The Statutes of the Realm.The Statutes of the Realme, are the resolute Decrees, and the absolute Judgements of the Parliament established by the King, with the common consent of the three Estates, who doe represent the whole and entire Body of the Realme of England.

To the purpose of this discourse, The law is: If any Charter bee graunted by the King, the which is repugnant to the Maximes, Customes, or Statutes of the Realme; Then is the Charter void, and it is either by Quo warranto, or by Scire facias (as learned men have left Presidents) to bee repealed. As in Anno. 19. Ed. 3.19. Ed. 3.

A Kings Grant repugnant to Satutes &c. not good.That a Kings Grant which is either repugnant to Law, Custome, or Statute, is not good nor pleadable in the Law; See what Presidents thereof have beene left by our wise Forefathers.

13. H. 6. H. 2.It is set downe in 13. H. 6. That King H. 2. had by his Charter granted to the Pryor and Monks of S. Bartholomews in London, that the Pryor and his Monks should be as free in their Church as the King was in his Crowne.

Yet by this grant was the Pryor and his Monks deemed and taken to be but as Subjects, and the aforesaid grant in that respect to be voide. For by the law the King may not any more disable himselfe of his regall superiority over his Subjects, then his subjects can renounce or avoide their subjection, against or towards their King or Superiour.

Stacyes, example.You know that Stacy would have renounced his loyalty and subjection to the Crowne of England, and would have adopted himself to have been a subject to King Philip of Spaine. But answer was made by the Court; That by the lawes of this Realme, neither may the King release or relinquish the subjection of his subject, neither may the subject revolt in his allegiance from the superiority of his Prince.

K. Ed. 3.There are two notable presidents in the time of King Edward 3. the which although they take place in someone respect; yet were they not adjudged of according to the minde of the King being the Grantor.

The L. Mountague.That is, the King granted unto the Lord William Mountague, the Isle of Wight, and that he should be crowned King of the same.

The Earle of Darby.And he also granted unto the Earle of Darby the Isle of Man, and that he should be crowned King of the same.

8. H. 4.Yet these two personages (notwithstanding the said grants) were subjects, and their Islands were under the dominion and subjection of the King, and in that respect were the grants voide.

31. H. 6.It was spoken in the 8. H. 4. Quod potestas Principis, non est inclusa legibus. That is, a Princes power is not bounded with rules or limits of the law: howsoever that sentence is so, the law agreed to the contrary.

The 31 H. 6. whereas it is agreed for law, That it is not in the Kings power to grant by his Charter, that a man seized of land in soe simple, may devise by his last Will and Testament the same lands to another, or that the youngest sonne by the custome of Burrough English, shall not inherit; or that lands being Frank see, should be of the nature of ancient demeasne.

34. H. 8. 39. Ass. 4. 8.Or that a new incorporated towne, that an assize of Fresh force should be used, or that they shall have toll, traverse, or through toll, or such like, &c. 37 H. 8. & 49. Ass. 4. 8.

See also a notable case agreed for law in 6. H. 7. where the Justices doe affirme the law to be, that Rape is made felony by statute, and that the same by the law is not inquirable but before Justices that have authority to heare and determine of the same.

In this case the King cannot by his Charter make the same offence to be enquired of in a Law day; nor the King cannot grant, that a Leet shall be of any other nature, then it is by the course of Common Law: So thereby it appeareth; that the King may not either alter the nature of the Law, the forme of a Court, or the manner or order of pleading.

Anno 8. H. 6.And in 8. H. 6. it is agreed for Law; That the King may not grant to I. S. That I. S. may be judge in his owne proper Cause; nor that I. S. shall be sued by an action at the Common Law, by any other person; nor that I. S. shall have a Market, a Faire, or a free Warrant in another mans soyle.

Hill Justice.And in the long Record by Hill the reverend Judge, it is said for Law; That whereas the King hath a prerogative, that Hee shall have the worship of the body of His Tenants (although he hold of the King but by posteriority) yet if the King grant over his Seigniory unto another with like prerogative (notwitstanding any Posteriority) the prerogative shall not passe: For (saith the Booke) the King by His Charter cannot change the Lawes.

The same Law is; That the King cannot grant unto another the prerogative of Nullum tempus occurrit Regi; nor that a Discent shall not take away an Entry; nor a Collaterall Warrant shall not bind; nor that Possessto Fratris shall not take place; nor that the wife shall not be endowed of her husbands lands; nor that Inheritance shall lineally descend; nor that any Subject shall be under protection from arrests, suits, and such like, &c. Yet doe not wee see daily in experience; That whatsoever can be procured under the Great Seale of England, is taken Quasi sanctim?

And although it be meerly against the Laws, Customes, and Statutes of this Realme; yet it is defended in such sort, that some have been called rebellious, for not allowing such voyd and unlawfull grants.

And an infinite number of such like presidents I could set downe to maintaine the aforesaid argument, but these few examples shall serve for this time.

The authority of the Governours of Bridewell.But now we have to see, if the said Charter granted to the Citie concerning the authoritie of the Governours of Bridewell, stand with the Lawes, Customes, and Statutes of this Realme or not.

The effect of which Charter in one place is; That the Governours have authority to search, enquire, and seek out idle Ruffians, Tavernehunters, Vagabonds, Beggars, and all persons of evill name and same, whatsoever they bee, men or women, and then to send and commit to Bridewell, or by any other wayes or meanes to punish or correct them, as shall seeme good to their discretions.

Here you see what the words of the said Charter are.

Now are wee to consider what the words of the Law be.

Magna Charta cap. 29.See Magna Charta of the Liberties of England cap. 29.

No Freeman shall be taken or Imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free customes, or to be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wayes destroyed, Nor wee shall not passe upon him nor condemne him, but by lawfull Judgement of men of his degree, or by the Law of the land.

Now if we doe compare the said Charter of Bridewell with the great Charter of England both in matter, sense, and meaning, you shall finde them meerely repugnant.

In the said great Charter of England, in the last Chapter amongst other things, the King granteth for him and his heires, That neither he nor his heires shall procure or do any thing, whereby the Liberties in the said Charter contained, shall be infringed or broken.

And if any thing be procured or done by any person contrary to the premisses, it shall be had of no force or effect.Stat. of Malb. cap. 3.

Here must you note also, That the said great Charter of England is not onely confirmed by the Statute of &illegible; cap. 3. but also by many other Statutes made in the time of King Edw. 3. King R. 2. Hen. 4. Hen. 5.King Ed. 3. R. 2. H. 4. H. 5. H. 6. and Hen. 6. Amongst sundry of which Confirmations, I do note one above the rest. The which is An. 43. Edw. 3. cap. 1. The words are these viz.

Anno 43. E. 3. cap. 1.It is assented and accorded, That the great Charter of England, and the Charter of the Forrests, shall be kept in all points: and if any Statute be made to the contrary they shall bee holden for none.

Hitherto you see it very plainly, That procurement nor Act done either by the King or any other person, or any Act of Parliament, or other thing; may in any wayes alter or change any one point contained in the said great Charter of England.

But if you will note the words, sence, matter, and meaning of the said Charter of Bridewell, you shall finde it all meerly repugnant to the said great Charter of England.

I doe note one speciall Statute made in the said 43. yeere of King Ed. 3. the which if it be well compared to the said Charter of Bridewell, it will make an end of this contention.

The words are these, viz.

Item, at the request of the Commons, by the Petition put forth, in this Parliament, to eschew the mischiefes and damages done to divers of the Commons by false Accuserss which often times have made their Accusements, more for vengeance and singular profit, then for the profit of the King and his people; of which accused persons, some have been taken and caused to come, &c. against the Law.

It is assented and accorded for the Government of the Commons, That no man be put to answer without presentment before the Justices of the King upon Record by due processe, As by Writ originall, according to the old Law of the land, And if any thing from henceforth be done to the contrary, it shall be void in the Law, and holden for Errour.

As I said before, so say I still; If this Statute be in force, as I am sure it is; then is the Law cleare: That the proceedings in Bridewell upon the accusation of Whoors taken by the Governours of Bridewell aforesaid; are not sufficient to call any man to answer by any Warrant by them made, without Indictment or other matter of Record, according to the old Law of the land.

Such like Commissions as this of Bridewell is, were granted in the time of King Ed. 3. by especiall procurement, to enquire of speciall Articles, the which Commissioners did make their Inquiries in secret places, &c.

Anno 42. E. 3. cap. 4.It was therefore enacted, Anno 42. Ed. 3. cap. 4. That from henceforth in all Inquiries within the Realme, Commissions should bee made to some Justices of one Bench or other, or Justices of Affize, or Justices of the Peace, with other of the most worthy of the Countie, &c.

By this Statute we may learne, that Commissioners of Inquiries ought to sit in open Courts, and not in any close or secret place, and that their Inquirie ought to be by Juries, and by no discussion or examination.

Anno 1. H. 8. cap. 8.If you looke upon the Statute of Anno H. 8. cap. 8. you shall there perceive the very cause, why Empson, Sheffeild, and others, were quite overthrown, the which was (as by the Indictments especially appeareth) for executing Commissions against due course of the Common Law, and in that they did not proceed in Justice according to the Liberties of the great Charter of England, and of other Laws and Statutes provided for the due executing of Justice.

There was a Commission granted forth in the beginning of the Raigne of Queene Elizabeth of happie memory unto Sir Ambrose Cave, Sir Richard Sackvile, and others, for the examination of Felons, and of other lewd persons. It so fell out, that many men of good calling were impeached by the accusation of Felons. Some great men and Judges also carred into the validity of the Commission, And it was thought that the Commission was against the Law, and therefore did the Commissioners give over the Commission, as all men know.

And whereas the Examination is by the Commission referred to the wisedome and discretion of the Governours of Bridewell, As touching this point, I find that the examination of robberies done by Sanctuarie men, was appointed to the discretion of the Councell, or to four Justices of the Peace; But this was not by Commission, or by Grant, but by Act of Parliament, made Anno 22. H. 8. cap. 14.

Anno 22. H. 8. cap. 14.The Justices of both the Benches have used to examine the abilities and disabilites of Attourneys, and by their discretions to place or remove them upon their misdemeanours without any solemnitie of triall at the Common-Pleas or Law, And that is and have been done by the Treasurer and Barons of the Exchequer touching their Attourneys.

But if you search the cause thereof, you shall finde the cause to be done by the authoritie of Parliament. An. 4. H. 4. cap. 1.

Anno 4. H. 4. cap. 1.And whereas sundry men are arrested by Latitat, Capias, Attachments, and such like Processe whereof their corporall presence is required, yet upon infirmities and other maladies, the Justices (having examined the matter) may by their discretions admit them to make Attourneyes.

Anno 7. H. 4. cap. 13.But note you in this case, that all this is done by authority of Parliament. An. 7. H. 4. cap. 13.

The Commission of Bankrupts gives power to their Commissioners to take order by their discretions both with the body and goods of the Bankrupt, and set the Bankrupt out of his house, and him to imprison, and all this is referred to the discretion of the Commissioners; But this is by authority of Parliament.Anno 13. Eliz. cap. 7. An. 13. Eliz. cap. 7.

The punishment and examination of such as countefeit Letters of privie tokens, is referred to the discretion of the Justices of peace in every Countie; But this is by Parliament. Anno 33. H. 8. cap. 1.Anno 33. H. 8. cap. 1.

The examination of Riots, Routs, and such like misdemeanours in the Star-chamber, is referred to the discretion of the Iudges of the Court;Anno 3. H. 7. cap. 1. But this is by Parliament. An. 3. H. 7. cap. 1. & An. 2. H. 8. cap. 20.

Anno 2. H. 8. cap. 20.The examination of vnlawfull hunting in Parks, warrens, &c. is referred to the discretion of the Iustices of the Peace. And if the Offender deny his hunting, then it is felony. This is also by Parliament. Anno 1. H. 7. cap. 7.

Anno 1. H. 7. cap. 7.The Rate, Taxation and punishment of servants, labourers, &c. of their wages, is referred to the discretion of the Iustices of Peace in every County, and Citie; but this is by Parliament. Anno 5. Eliz. cap. 4.

Anno 5. Eliz. cap. 4.The examination of Rogues and Vagabonds with the forme of their punishment, is referred to the Iustices, but by Parliament.

The determination of all causes in Wales, is referred to bee ended by the Kings Councell there established, by their Wisdomes and discretions; but yet this is by Parliament.

The Grant of the Pluralities, Tot quots, Qualifications, Dispensations, Licences, and Tollerations, is referred to the discretion of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury; but this is by Parliament.

The dealings and examinations of High Commissioners are authorized altogether by Parliament.

And to be short, you shall find in the great volume of the Statutes, neere the number of fortie Acts of Parliament, that doe refer the examination and punishment of Offenders to the wisdome and discretion of the Iustices.

Whereupon I doe note:

Nota.That if the King by Prerogative might have done all things by Commission, or by Charter; That it had been in vaine to have made so many Lawes in Parliament for the same.

And to make the Law more manifest in this question, In ann. 42. Ed. 3. lib.Ann. 42. E. 3. lib. Assiz. 11. 5. Assiz. 11. 5. A Commission was sent out of the Chancerie to one I. S. and others, to arrest the body and goods of A. B. and him to imprison; and the Iustices gave judgement, that this Commission was directly against the Law, to take any ones body without Indictment: and therefore they took the Commission from the Commissioners,Nota. to the intent to deliver the same to the Kings Councell, Quod nota.

Anno 24. E. 3.And I doe also find in the 24. yeere of King E. 3. this president, That a Commission was granted to certaine persons, to indict all those who were notoriously standered for any felonies, trespasses, or for any other misdemeinons, yea although they were indicted for the same.

And it was adjudged that this Commission was directly against the Law.

And thus I doe conclude upon the whole matter.

That the Commission of Bridewell would bee well considered of by the learned Councell of the citie: For I do not think to the contrary; but that there bee learned, that by their great knowledge in the Law, are well able either in a Quo warranto, or any other action brought to defend the same.

FINIS.

 


8.16. Philip Hunton, A Treatise of Monarchy (24 May, 1643)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Philip Hunton, A Treatise of Monarchie, Containing two Parts: 1. Concerning Monarchy in generall. 2. Concerning this particular Monarchy. Wherein all the maine Questions occurrent in both, are stated, disputed, and determined: And in the close, the Contention now in being, is moderately debated, and the readiest meanes of Reconcilement proposed. Done by an earnest Desirer of his Countries Peace. London, Printed for John Bellamy, and Ralph Smith, and are to be sold at the three golden Lions in Corn-hill, Anno Dom. 1643.

Estimated date of publication

24 May, 1643.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 262; Thomason E. 103 (15.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

THE PREFACE:

I Write not this Discourse to soment or heighten the wofull dissention of the Kingdome; but if possible to cure, or at least to allay it: That former too many have done already, this latter, much too few.

When a Patient lies sicke under the destroying paroxismes of a Fever, every stander-by will be telling his Medicine, though he be no Physitian: O then let no Sonne of this State account it presumption in me, for putting in my judgement, and speaking that which I conceive might, if not remove, yet mitigate this fatall distemperature of our common Mother: at another time perhaps it might be censurable, but in this exigence laudable.

Something I was full of, which I conceited might doe good; here I have produced it. And now if any man can finde a better way to appeasement, for the sake of peace let him speedily declare it.

I intend not these ensuing Disputes to any highflowne judgements, who looke downe on all mens, but their owne, to censure, not to be informed, nor to any which hath designes of his owne, which on the opportunity of this Division hee meanes to follow; nor to any who is already possessed by an opinion, which hee resolves to make good: But to the calme and impartiall spirit of every judicious, peacefull man; Let him weigh my Assertions by my grounds on which I build them, and if he find them any where unsound, let him thew mee in what, and I will gladly and thankfully reforme my errour: For as I love not obstinacy in groundlesse opinions in others, so I would avoid it in my selfe.

I have not annexed my Name, not that I am ashamed to owne what I conceive to be the truth; but because I know who I am, and that my Name could adde no estimation to the Treatise: Nor do I desire it should: They who search for Truth must regard Things, not Persons: Give me therefore the now common Liberty to goe namelesse; many have taken it for worse ends. If any condemn me for any thing here, it must be for endevouring a thanklesse Moderation ’twixt two Extremes. But I will detaine you no longer at the doore.

The Contents of the ensuing Treatise.

  • Part. 1.  Of Monarchy in generall.
    • Cap. 1.  Of Politicall Government.
      • ITs Originall: How farre forth is is from God? Sect. 1.
      • Its end: whether the end of government be the peoples good? Sect. 2.
      • Its division into severall sorts. Sect. 3.
    • Cap. 2.  Of the division of Monarchy into absolute and limited.
      • Whether absolute Monarchy be a lawfull Government? Sect. 1.
      • Of three degrees of absolutenes in Monarchy. Sect. 2.
      • Whether Resistence be lawfull in absolute Monarchy? Sect. 3.
      • What it is which constituteth a Monarchy limited? Sect. 4.
      • How farre subjection is due in a limited Monarchy? Sect. 5.
      • How farre resistence is lawfull in a limited Monarchy? Sect. 6.
      • Who shall be Iudge of the excesses of a limited Monarch? Sect. 7.
    • Cap. 3.  Of the division of Monarchy into elective and successive.
      • Elective and successive Monarchies, what they are? Sect. 1.
      • Whether all Monarchy be originally from the peoples consent? Sect. 2.
      • Of Monarchy by divine Institution. Sect. 3.
      • Of Monarchy by prescription. Sect. 4.
      • Of Monarchy by Conquest. Sect. 5.
      • Whether Conquest can give a just Title? Sect. 5.
      • Whether a successive Monarch may be also limited? Sect. 6.
    • Cap. 4.  Of the division of Monarchy into simple and mixed.
      • Simple and mixed Monarchy what they are? Sect. 1.
      • What it is which constituteth a Monarchy mixed? Sect. 2.
      • How farre the Princes power extends in a mixed Monarchy? Sect. 3.
  • Part 2.  Of this particular Monarchy.
    • Cap. 1.  Whether the power wherewith our Kings be invested be an absolute or limited and moderated Power?
      • The Question stated. Sect. 1.
      • Proved radically limited. Sect. 2.
      • Contrary Arguments answered. Sect. 3. & 4.
    • Cap. 2.  Wherein and how this Monarchy is limited and defined?
    • Cap. 3.  Whether it be of a simple or mixed constitution?
      • It is proved to be fundamentall mixed. Sect. 1.
      • The Arguments for the contrary are answered. Sect. 2.
      • Whether the Authority of the two Houses be subordinate and derived from the Kings? Sect. 3.
      • The Question resolved and cleared. Sect. 4.
    • Cap. 4.  How farre forth this Monarchy is mixed, and what part of the power is referred to a mixed subject?
    • Cap. 5.  How farre forth the two estates may oppose the Will and proceedings of the Monarch?
      • The Question duly stated. Sect. 1, 2.
      • Whether Resistence of Instruments of illegall Commands be lawfull? Sect. 3.
      • Proved lawfull. Sect. 3.
      • Contrary Arguments dissolved. Sect. 4.
    • Cap. 6. 
      • In what cases the other Estates may assume the Armes of the Kingdome for resistence of Instruments of arbitrary Commands? Answered negatively. Sect. 1.
      • Affirmatively. Sect. 2.
    • Cap. 7. 
      • Where the legall power of finall Iudging of these cases doth reside, the three estates differing about them?
      • The Question is stated and determined. Sect. 1.
      • Arguments contrary are answered. Sect. 2.
      • What to be done in such dissention. Sect. 3.
    • Cap. 8. 
      • The former Truths brought home to the present contention. Sect. 1.
      • A moderate debate concerning the present contention. Sect. 2.
      • The speediest meanes of Reconcilement proposed. Sect. 3.

A TREATISE OF MONARCHIE.

Part. I.
Cap. I. Of Politicall Government, and its Distinction into severall Kinds.

Sect. 1.GOvernment and Subjection are Relatives, so that what is said of the One, may in proportion be said of the other: Which being so, it will be needlesse to treat of both: because it will be easie to apply what is spoken of one to the other. Government is Potestatis Exercitium, the exercise of a Morall Power. One of these is the Root and Measure of the other; which if it exceed, is exorbitant, is not Government, but a Transgression of it. This Power and Government is differenced with respect to the Governed to wit, a Family, which is called Oeconomicall: or a publike society, which is called Politicall, or Magistracie. Concerning this Magistracie we will treat 1. in generall. 2. Of the principall kind of it.

In generall concerning Magistracie. There are two things about which I find difficultie and difference, viz. the Originall and the End.

Authority, how farre from God, how farre from Men.First for the Originall: There seem to be two extremes in Opinion; while some amplifie the Divinitie thereof: Others speak so slightly of it, as if there were little els but Humane Institution in it. I will briefly lay down my apprehensions of the evident truth in this point: and it may be, things being clearly and distinctly set down, there will be no reall ground for contrariety in this matter. Three things herein must necessarily be distinguished, viz. 1. The Constitution of Power of Magistracie in generall. 2. The Limitation of it to this or that kind. 3. The Determination of it to this or that Individuall Person or Line.

For the first of these, 1. It is Gods expresse Ordinance that in the societies of Mankind, there should be a Magistracie or Government. At first when there were but two, God ordeyned it, Gen. 3. 16. St. Paul affirmes as much of the Powers that be, none excepted, Rom. 131. 2. This Power where ever placed ought to be respected as a participation of divine Soveraignty, Psal, 82. 1. 6. and every soule ought to be subject to it for the Lords sake 1 Pot. 2. 13. that is, for conscience sake of Gods Ordinance, Rom. 13. 5. and under penaltie of Damnation, v. 2. These are Truths against which there is no colour of opposition. Indeed this Power may be claymed by them who have it not; and where there is a limitation of this Power, subjection may be claymed in cases which are without those limits: But to this Ordinance of Power where it is and when it requires subjection, it must be given; as before.

For the second. 1. In some particular communities the Limitation of it to this or that kind, is an immediate Ordinance of God: so Kingly Power was appointed to the Jewes on their desire, 1 Sam. 8. 9. whether they had not a kind of Monarchicall Government before, I will not stand on it: but it is evident that then, on their earnest desire God himselfe condescended to an establishment of Regalitie in that state. 2. But for a generall binding Ordinance, God hath given no word, either to command or commend one kind above another: Men may according to their Relations to the forme they live under to their affections and judgements in divers respects, preferre this or that form above the rest; but we have no divine limitation: and it were an absurditie to think so; for then we should uncharitably condemne all the Communities which have not that form for violation of Gods Ordinance and pronounce those other Powers unlawfull. 3. This then must have another and lower fountain to flow from, which can be no other then Humane. The higher Power is Gods Ordinance: That it resideth in One, or more, in such or such a way is from humane designment: for when God leaves a matter indifferent, the restriction of this indifferencie is left to secondary causes. And I conceive this is St. Peters meaning, when he calls Magistracie α&illegible;νωπί η &illegible;σος, Humano Creature; S. Paul calls it Gods Ordinance, because the Power is Gods: S. Peter calls it humane Ordinance, because the specification of it to this or that form, is from the societies of Mankind. I confesse it may be called a humane Creature, in regard of its subject, which is a Man, or Men: or its End which is to rule over Men for the good of Men, but the other seems more naturall: and it induces no disparagement to Authority, being so understood. But how ever you take that place, yet the thing affirmed stands good, that God by no word binds any people to this or that form, till they by their own Act bind themselves.

For the third: the same is to be said of it as of the second: some particular men we find whom God was pleased by his own immediate choise to invest with this his Ordinance of Authority: Moses, Saul, David, yea God by his immediate Ordinance determined the Government of that people to Davids posteritie and made it successive; so that that People after his appointment and word was made known to them, and the room voyd by Sauls death was as immediately bound by divine: Law to have David, and his Sonnes after him to be Magistrates, as to Magistracie it selfe. But God hath not done so for every people: ascriptumest cannot be alledged for the endowing this or that person or stock with Soveraignty over a community: They alone had the priviledge of an extraordinary Word. All others have the ordinary and mediate hand or God to enthrone them: They attaine this determination of Authority to their Persons by the tacite and virtuall, or else expresse and formall consent of that Society of men they governe, either in their owne persons, or the root of their succession, as I doubt not, in the sequele it will be made appeare. But let no man thinke that it is any lessening or weakning of Gods Ordinance in them to teach that it is annexed to their Persons by a humane Meane: for though it be not so full a title to come to it by the simple Providence of God, as by the expresse Precept of God: yet when by the disposing hand of Gods Providence a Right is conveyed to a person or family, by the meanes of a publique Fundamentall Oath. Contract and Agreement of a State, it is equivalent then to a Divine Word; and within the bounds of that publique Agreement the conveyed Power is as Obligatory, as if an immediate word had designed it. Thus it appears that they which say there is divinum quiddam in Soveraignes, and that they have their power from God, speake in some sence truth; As also they which say that originally Power is in the People, may in a sound sence be understood. And in these things we have Dr. Ferns consent in his late discourse upon this subject. Sect. 3.

Sect. 2.For the end of Magistracie; to set out that is no hard matter,Whether the end of Government be the peoples good? if we consider what was looked at when God ordeyned it. That was the Good of the society of men over which it is set: So Saint Paul, Rom. 13. 4. σοι ες τ γαθν. God aymed at it in the Institution of Government: and so do all men in the choice of it, where they may be choosers: such a Government, and such persons to sway it, as may most conduce to publique Weale. Also it is the measure of all the Acts of the Governour: and he is good or bad according as he uses his Power to the good of the State wherewith he is intrusted. That is the end: but not the sole end; The preservation of the Power and Honour of the Governour is an end too: but I thinke not co-ordinate, but subordinate to the other: because doubtles in the Constitution of Government, that is first thought on, and this in congruity to that; Also the reason why the Power and Honour of the Magistrate must be preserved, is for the publique societies sake because its welfare depends thereon: And if it fall out that one of them must suffer: every good Magistrate will descend something from his greatnes be it for the good of the Community: On the other side, though every subiect ought for the honour and good of the Magistrate to give up his private; yet none ought to advance the greatnes of his Soveraign with the publique detriment. Whence in my apprehension the end of Magistracie is the good of the whole Body, Head, and Members conjunctly: but if we speak division, then the good of the Society is the Ultime end: and next to that, as conducent to that, the Governours Greatnes and Prerogative. And herein also accordeth Dr. Fern with us. Sect. 3. Where he sayes, That the people are the end of the governing Power. There is another question of mainer concernment, here in our generall discourse of Authority fitly to be handled. viz. How farre subjection is due to it? but because it hath a great dependance on the kinds and States of Power, and cannot be so well conceived without the Precognition thereof: I will referre it to after opportunities.

Sect. 3.For the division of this Power of Magistracie. It cannot be well divided into several species; for it is one simple thing an indivisible beame of Divine Perfection;Division of Magistracie. yet for our more distinct conceaving thereof, Men have framed severall distinctions of it. So with respect of its measure, it is absolute or limited: In respect of its manner. It is, as St. Peter divides it, Supreame, or Subordinate. In respect of its Meane of acquiring, it is Elective, or successive; for I conceive that of Conquest, and Prescription of usuage are reducible to one of these, as will appeare afterwards. In respect of its degrees it is Nomotheticall or Architectonicall and Gubernative or Executive. And in respect of the subject of its residence there is an ancient and usuall distinction of it into Monarchicall, Aristocraticall and Democraticall. These either simple or mixt of two, or all three together, of which the Predominant gives the denomination. These are not accurate specificative, Divisions of Power, for it admits none such, but partitions of it according to divers respects. The course of my intention directs me to speak only of Monarchicall Power, which is the chiefe and most usuall forme of Government in the world; The other two being apt to resolve into this, but this not so apt to dissolve into them.


Chap. II. Of the Division of Monarchy into absolute and limited.

Sect. 1.NOW we must know that most of those distinctions which were applyed to Power in generall are appliable to Monarchy because the respects on which they arise are to be found in it. But I will insist on the three main divisions: for the handling of them will bring us to a cleare understanding of what is needfull to be known about Monarchicall Power.

First, of the distinction of Monarchy into Absolute and Limited. Absolute Monarchy is when the Soveraignty is so fully in one that it hath no Limits or Bounds under God, but his owne Will. It is when a people are absolutely resigned up or resigne up themselves to be governed by the will of one man. Such were the ancient Easterne Monarchies, and that of the Persian and Turke at this day, as farre as we know. This is a lawfull GovernmentWhether absolute Monarchy be a lawfull government. and therefore where men put themselves into this utmost degree of subjection by Oath and Contract, or are borne and brought unto it by Gods Providence it binds them and they must abide it because an Oath to a lawfull thing is Obligatory. This in Scripture is very evident as Ezek. 17. 16. 18. 19. Where Iudgement is denounced against the King of Iudab for breaking the Oath made to the King of Babylon; and it is called Gods Oath, yet doubtles this was an Oath of absolute subjection. And Rom. 13. the power which then was, was absolute; yet the Apostle not excluding it calls it Gods ordinance, and commands subjection to it: so Christ commands tribute to be paid, and payes it himselfe; yet it was an arbitrary taxe, the production of an absolute power. Also the soveraignty of masters over servants was absolute, and the same in Oeconomy as absolute Monarchy is in policie, yet the Apostle enjoynes not masters called to Christianity to renounce that title as too great and rigid to be kept but exhorts them to moderation in the exercise of it; and servants to remaine contented in the condition of their servitude. More might be said to legitimate this kinde of government, but it needs not in so plaine a case.

Sect. 2.This absolute Monarchy hath three degrees, yet all within the state of absolutenesse. The first, when the Monarch, whose will is the peoples Law,Three degrees of absolutenesse. doth set himselfe no stated Rule or Law to rule by, but by immediate Edicts and commands of his owne will governes them, as in his owne and Councels judgement he thinks fit. Secondly, when he sets downe a Rule and Law by which he will ordinarily govern, reserving to himselfe liberty to vary from it, wherein, and as oft as in his discretion he judges fit: and in this the Soveraigne is as free as the former, onely the people are at a more certainty what he expects from them in ordinary. Thirdly, when he not onely sets downe an expresse Rule and Law to governe by, but also promiseth and engages himself in many cases not to alter that rule: but this engagement is an after condescent and act of grace, not dissolving the absolute oath of subiection, which went before it, nor is intended to be the rule of his power, but of the exercise of it. This Ruler is not so absolute as the former in the use of his power, for he hath put a bond on that, which he cannot breake without breach of promise; that is, without sin: but he is as absolute in his power, if he will sinfully put it forth into act, it hath no politick bounds, for the people still owe him absolute subiection, that not being dissolved or lessened by an act of grace comming afterwards.

Sect. 3.Now in governments of this nature, How far obedience is due, and, Whether any resistance be lawfull, is a question which here must be decided. For the due effecting whereof, we must premise some needfull distinctions to avoid confusion. Obedience is twofold; first, Positive and active,Whether resistance be lawfull in absolute Monarchy. when in conscience of an authority we doe the thing commanded: secondly, Negative and passive, when though we answer not Authority by doing, yet we doe it by contented undergoing the penalty imposed. Proportionably resistance is twofold: first. Positive, by an opposing of force: secondly, Negative, when onely so much is done as may defend our selves from force, without returne of force against the Assailant. Now this negative resistance is also twofold: first, In inferiour and sufferable cases: secondly, or in the supreme case and last necessity of life and death: and then too it is first, either of particular person or persons; secondly, or of the whole community. And if of particular persons, then either under plea and pretence of equity assaulted; or else without any plea at all, meerly for will and pleasure sake; for to that degree of rage and cruelty sometimes the heart of man is given over. All these are very distinguishable cases, and will be of use either in this or the ensuing disputes.

Assert. 1.To the question I say. First, Positive obedience is absolutely due to the will and pleasure of an absolute Monarch, in all lawfull and indifferent things: because in such a State the will of the Prince is the supreme Law, so that it binds to obedience in every thing not prohibited by a superiour, that is. Divine Law: for it is in such case the higher power, and is Gods ordinance.

Assert. 2.Secondly, When the will of an absolute Monarch commands a thing forbidden to be done by Gods Law then it bindes not to active obedience; then is the Apostles rule undoubtedly true, It is better to obey God then men: For the Law of the inferiour gives place to the superiour. In things defined by God, it should be all one with us for the Magistrate to command us to transgresse that, as to command us an impossibility; and impossibilities fall under no Law. But on this ground no man must quarrell with Authoritie, or reject its commands as unlawfull, unlesse there be an open unlawfulnesse in the face of the act commanded. For if the unlawfulnesse be hidden in the ground or reason of the action, inferiours must not be curious to enquire into the grounds or reasons of the commands of superiours; for such licence of enquiry would often frustrate great undertakings, which much depend on speed and &illegible; of execution. I speak all this of absolute government, where the will and reason of the Monarch is made the higher power, and its expression the supreme Law of a State.

Assert. 3.Thirdly, suppose an absolute Monarch should so degenerate into Monstrous unnaturall Tyranny, as apparently to seeke the destruction of the whole community, subject to him in the lowest degree of vassallage, then such a community may negatively resist such subversion: yea, and if constrained to it by the last necessity, positively resist and defend themselves by force against any instruments whatsoever, imployed for the effecting thereof. 1. David did so in his particular case, when pursued by Soul: he made negative resistence by flight, and doubtlesse he intended positive resistence against any instrument, if the negative would not have served the turne: else why did he so strengthen himselfe by Forces? sure not to make positive resistance, and lay violent hands upon the Person of the Lords Anointed, as it appeared; yet for some reason he did it doubtlesse, which could be none other, but by that force of Armes to defend himselfe against the violence of any mis-imployed inferiour hands. If then he might doe it for his particular safety, much rather may it be done for the publike. 2. Such an act is without the compasse of any the most absolute Potentate; and therefore to resist in it can be to resist no power, nor the violation of any due of subjection. For, first, the most submisse subjection ever intended by any community, when they put themselves under anothers power, was the command of a reasonable will and power; but to will and command the destruction of the whole body over which a power is placed, were an act of will most unreasonable and &illegible; destructive, and so not the act of such a will, to which subjection was intended by any reasonable creatures. Secondly, the publike good and being is armed at in the &illegible; bond of subjection; for in the constitution of such unlimited soveraignty, though every particular mans good and being is subjected to the will of One supreme yet certainly the conservation of the whole Publike was intended by it; which being invaded; the intent of the constitution is overthrowne: and an act is done which can be supposed to be within the compasse of no politicall power: So that did Nero as it was reported of him in his immanity thirst for the destruction of whole Rome; and if he were truly what the Senate pronounced him to be, Humazi generos hostes, then it might justifie a negative resistance of his person; and a positive, of any Agent should be set on so inhumane a service. And the united Provinces are allowed in resisting &illegible; 2d. though he had bin their absolute Monarch, if he resolved the extirpation of the whole people, and the planting the countrey with Spaniards, as it is reported he did. And that assertion of some, that All resistance is against the Apostles prohibition. Resistance by power of Armes is utterly unlawfull, cannot be justified in such a latitude. But of this more will be spoken in the current of this discourse.

Assert. 4.Fourthly, suppose by such a power any particular person or persons life be invaded, without any plea of reason or cause for it, I suppose it hard to deny him liberty of negative resistance of power; yea, and positive, of any Agents, in such assault of murther: for though the case be not so cleare as the former yet it seemes to me justified by the fact of David, and the rescuing of Jonathan from the causlesse cruell intent of his Fathers putting him to death. As also such an act of will carrying no colour of reason with it, cannot be esteemed the act of a rationall will, and so no will intended to be the Law of Soveraignty. Not that I thinke a Monarch of such absolutenesse is bound to yeeld a reason why he commands any man to be put to death, before his command be obeyed; but I conceive the person so commanded to death may bee justified before God and men for protecting himselfe by escape, or otherwise, unlesse some reason or cause bee made knowne to him of such command.

Assert. 5.Fifthly, Persons subject to an unlimited dominion must without resistance subject their Estates, Liberties, Persons, to the will and pleasure of their Lord, so it carry any plea or shew of reason and equity. First, it seemes to me evident, 1 Pes. 2. 18, 19, 20. if well doing be mistaken by the reason and judgement of the power for ill doing, and we be punished for it, yet the Magistrate going according to his misguided reason, it is the command of a reasonable will, and so to be submitted to, because such a one suffers by Law, in a State where the Lords will is the Law. Secondly, In commands of the power where is the plea of reason and equity on the part of the commander, whether it be such indeed, some power must judge, but the constitution of absolute Monarchy resolves all judgement into the will of the Monarch, as the supreme Law: so that if his will judicially censure it just, it must be yeelded to as if it were just without repeale or redressement by any created power. And let none complaine of this as a hard condition, when they or their Ancestors have subjected themselves to such a power by oath, or politicall contract: If it be Gods ordinance to such, it must be subjected to and its exorbitances born, as he sayes in &illegible; as men beare famine, pestilence, and other effects of Gods displeasure.

Assert. 6.Sixthly in absolute Monarchy the person of the Monarch is above the reach of just force and positive resistance: for such a full resignation of mens selves to his will and power, by the irrevocable oath and bond of politicall contract, doth make the person as sacred as the Unction of Saul or David. In such a State all lawful power is below him, so that he is uncapable of any penall hand, which must be from a superiour, or it is uniust. I have bin the longer on this absolute Monarchy, because though it doth not concerne us, yet it will give light to the stating of doubts in governments of a more restrained nature: for what is true here in the full extent of power, is there also as true within the compasse of their power.

Sect. 4.In moderate or limited Monarchy it is an enquiry of some weight to know,What make a Monarchy limited? What it is which constitutes it in the state of alimitted Monarchy.

Assert. 1.First, A Monarchy may be stinted in the exercise of its power, and yet be an absolute Monarchy, as appeared before in our distinction of absolute Monarchy: If that bounds be a subsequent act, and proceeding from free will and grace in the Monarch; for it is not the exercise, but the nature and measure of power, wherewith he is radically invested, which deneminates him a free, or conditionate Monarch.

Assert. 2.Secondly, I take it, that a limited Monarch must have his bounds of power ab excerno, not from the free determination of his owne will. And now Kings have not divine words and binding Lawes to constitute them in their Soveraignty, but derive it from ordinary providence, the sole meane hereof is the consent and fundamentall contract of a Nation of men, which consent puts them in their power, which can be no more nor other then is conveyed to them by such contract of subiection. This is the root of all soveraignty individuated and existent in this or that person or family; till this come and lift him up he is a private man, not differing in state from the rest of his brethren; but then he becomes another man, his person is sacred by that soveraignty conveyed to it, which is Gods ordinance and image. The truth hereof will be more fully discovered, when we come to speake of Elective and Successive Monarchy.

Assert. 3.Thirdly, He is then a limited Monarch, who hath a Law beside his owne will for the measure of his power. First, the supreme power of the State must be in him, so that his power must not be limited by any power above his; for then hee were not a Monarch, but a subordinate magistrate. Secondly, this supreme power must be restrained by some Law, according to which this &illegible; was given, and by direction of which this power must act; else he were not a limited Monarch, that is, a liege Soveraigne, or legall King. Now a Soveraignty comes thus to be legall, or defined to a rule of Law, either by originall constitution, or by after-condescent. By originall constitution, when the society publike conferres on one man a power by limited contract, resigning themselves to his government by such a Law, reserving to themselves such immunities: In this case, they which at first had power over themselves, had power to set their owne termes of subiection; and hee which hath no title of power over them but by their act, can de jure have no greater then what is put over to him by that act By after-condescent, viz. when a Lord, who by conquest, or other right, hath an absolute arbitrary power; but not liking to hold by such a right, doth either formally or virtually desert it, and take a new legall right as judging it more safe for him to hold by, and desirable of the people to be governed by. This is equivalent to that by originall constitution; yea, is all one with it: for this is in that respect a secondary originall constitution. But if it be objected, that this being a voluntary condescent is an act of grace, and so doth not derogate from his former absolutenesse, as was said before of an absolute Monarch, who confines himselfe to governe by one rule; I answer. This differs essentially from that: for there, a free Lord, of grace yeelds to rule by such a Law, reserving the fulnesse of power, and still requiring of the people a bond and oath of utmost indefinite subjection; so that it amounts not to a limitation of radicall power: whereas here is a change of title, and a resolution to be subiected to, in no other way, then according to such a frame of government; and accordingly no other bond or oath of allegeance is required, or taken, then according to such a Law: this amounts to a limitation of radicall power. And therefore they speak too generally, who affirme of all acts of grace proceeding from Princes to people, as if they did not limit absolutenesse: ’Tis true of acts of grace of that first kinde; but yet you see, an act of grace may be such a one, as may amount to a resignation of that absolutenesse, into a more milde and moderate power, unlesse we should hold it out of the power of an absolute Lord to be other; or that by free condescent, and act of grace, a man cannot as well part with, or exchange his right and title to a thing, as define himselfe in the use and exercue; which I thinke none will affirme.

Sect. 5.In all Governments of this allay and legall Constitution there are three Questions of speciall moment to be considered.

How farre subiection is due in a limited Monarchy?First, How farre subjection is due? As farre as they are Gods Ordinance, as farre as they are a power and they are a power as farre as the Contract fundamentall from which under God their authority is derived, doth extend. As absolute Lords must be obeyed as farre as their Will enjoynes, because their Will is the measure of their Power, and their subjects Law: so these in the utmost extent of the Law of the Land, which is the measure of their power, and their subjects duty of obedience. I say so farre, but I doe not say no further: for I believe, though on our former grounds it clearely followes that such Authority transcends its bounds. if it command beyond the Law: and the Subject legally is not bound to subjection in such case, yet in Conscience a Subject is bound to yeeld to the Magistrate, even when he cannot de jure, challenge obedience, to prevent scandall or any occasion of slighting the power which may sometimes grow, even upon a just refusall: I say, for these causes a subject ought not to use his liberty, but more us gerere, if it be in a thing in which he can possibly without subversion, and in which his act may not be made a leading case, and so bring on a prescription against publique Liberty.

Sect. 6.Secondly, how farre it is lawfull to resist the exorbitant Illegal Commands of such a Monarch? 1. As before in lighter cases, in which it may be done, for the reasons alledged, and for the sake of publique peace,How farre it is Lawfull to resist we ought to submit, and make no resistance at all, but de jure receaere.

Pos. 1.2. In cases of higher nature Passive resistance, viz. By appeale to Law, by Concealment, by Flight, is lawfull to be made, because such a Command is politically powerles,Pos. 2. it proceeds not from Gods Ordinance in him: and so we sin not against Gods Ordinance in such Non-submission, or Negative resistance.

Pos. 3.3.For instruments or Agents in such commands, if the streight be such, and a man be surprized, that no place is left for an appeale nor evasion by Negative resistance; I conceive, against such Positive resistence may be made: because authority failing or this Act in the Supreame Power, the Agent or instrument can have none derived to him; and so is but in the nature of a private person, and his Act as an offer of private violence, and so comes under the same rules for opposition.

Pos. 4.4. For the person of the Soveraigne, I conceive it, aswell above any Positive Resistence, as the Person of an absolute Monarch; Yea, though by the whole Community, (except there be an expresse reservation of Power in the body of the State, or any deputed Persons or Court, to use in case of intolerable exorbitance. Positive Resistence, which, if there be, then such a Governour is no Monarch, for that Fundamentall Reservation destroyes it’s being a Monarchy, in asmuch as the Supreame Power is not in one.) For where ever there is a Soveraigne Politique Power constituted, the person or persons who are invested with it are Sacred, and out of the reach of Positive Resistance or Violence: which, as I said, if just, must be from no inferior or subordinate hand. But it will be objected, that sith every Monarch hath his power from the consent of the whole body, that consent of the whole Body hath a Power above the Power of the Monarch, and so the resistance which is done by it, is not by an inferior power and to this purpose is brought that Axiome. Quiequia efficit tale est magia tale. I answer, That rule even in naturall causes is lyable to abundance of restrictions: And in the particular in hand it holds not. Where the cause doth bereave himselfe of that perfection by which it works, in the very act of causing, and convey it to that effect, It doth not remain more such then the effect, but much lesse, and below it, as if I convey an estate of Land to another, it doth not hold that after such conveyance I have a better Estate remayning in me then that other, but rather the contrary; because what was in one is passed to the other: The Servant who at the year of Iubile would not go out free, but have his eare boared, and given his Master a full Lordship over him: can we argue, that he had afterward more power over himselfe then his Master, because he gave his Master that power over him, by that act of Oeconomicall Contract. Thus the Community whose consent establishes a Power over them cannot be said universally to have an eminencie of Power above that which they constitute; sometimes they have, sometimes they have not: and to judge when they have when not respect must be had to the Origiginall Contract and Fundamentall Constitution of that State, if they have constituted a Monarchy, that is invested one man with the Soveraignty of Power; and subjected all the rest to him; Then it were unreasonable to say, they yet have it in them selves; Or have a power of recalling that Supremacie which by Oath and Contract they themselves transferred on another: unles we make this Oath and Contract lesse binding then private ones, dissoluble at pleasure, and so all Monarchs Tenants at will from their people. But if they in such Constitution reserve a power in the body to oppose and displace the Magistrate for exorbitancies, and reserve to themselves a Tribunall to trie him in, that man is not a Monarch but the Officer and Substitute of him or them to whom such Power over him is reserved or conferred. The Issue is this, If he be a Monarch he hath the Apex or Culmen Potestatis, and all his Subjects divesim and conjunctions, are below him: They have devested themselves of all superiority and no Power left for a Positive Opposition of the Person of him whom they have invested.

Sect. 7.Thirdly, Who shall be the Iudge of the Excesses of the Soveraigne Lord in Monarchies of this composure? I answer, A frame of Government cannot be imagined of that perfection but that some inconveniencies there will be possible for which there can be provided no remedie:Who shall be the Iudge of the excesses of the Monarch? Many miseries to which a people under an absolute Monarchie are lyable are prevented by this Legall Allay and definement of Power. But this is exposed to one defect from which that is tree, that is an impossibility of &illegible; a Judge to determine this last controversie, viz. the Soveraignes transgressing his fundamentall limits. This Judge must be either some Forraigner, and then &illegible; lose the freedome of the State, by subjecting it to an externall power in the greatest case: or else within the body: If so than neither the Monarch himselfe, and then you destroy the frame of the State, and make it absolute; for to define a Power to a Law, and then to make him Judge of his Deviations from that Law, is to absolve him from all Law Or else the Community and their Deputies must have this power: and then, as before, you put the apex Potastants, the &illegible; χ&illegible;ς in the whole body, or a part of it, and destroy the being of Monarchy: The Ruler not being Gods immediate Minister but of that Power, be it where it will to which he is &illegible; for his actions. So that I conceive, in a limited legall Monarchy, there can be no stated internall Judge of the Monarchs actions, if there grow a fundamentall Variance betwixt him and the Community. But you will say, It is all one way to absolutenesse to assigne him no Judge as to make him his own Judge. Answ. I say not simple in this case there is no Judge: But that there can be no Judg legall and constituted within that frame of Government: but it is a transcendent case beyond the provision of that Government, and must have an extraordinary Judge, and way of devision.

In this great and difficult case, I will deliver my apprehensions freely and clearly, submining them to the centure of betten Iudgements. Suppose the controversie to happen in a Government fundamentally legall, and the people no further subjected then to Government by such a Law.Pos. 1.

1. If the act in which the exorbitance and transgression is supposed to be, be of lesser moment, and not striking at the very being of that Government it ought to be borne by publique patience, rather then to endanger the being of the State be a contention betwixt the head and body Politique.

2. If it be mortall and such as suffered, dissolves the frame and life of the Government and publique liberty.Pos. 2. Then the illegality and destructive nature is to be set open, and redresment sought by Petition; which if failing, Prevention by resistance ought to be. But first that it is such must be made apparent; and if it be apparent, and an Appeale made ad &illegible; generu humans, especially of these of that Community, then the fundamentall Lawes of that Monarchy must iudge and pronounce the sentence in every mans conscience; and every man (as farre as concernes him) must follow the evidence of Truth in his owne soule, to oppose, or not oppose, according as he can in conscience acquit or condemne the act of carriage of the Governour. For I conceive in a Case which transcends the frame and provision of the Government they are bound to. People are unbound, and in state as if they had no Government; and the superiour Law of Reason and Conscience must be Judge: wherein every one must procced with the utmost advice and impartiality: For if hee erre in iudgement hee either resists Gods Ordinance, or puts his hand to the subversion of the State and Policy he lives in.

And this power of judging argues not a superiority in those who Judge, over him who is Judged: for it is not Authoritative and Civill, but morall, residing in reasonable Creatures and lawfull for them to execute, because never devested and put off by any act in the constitution of a legall Government, but rather the reservation of it intended: For when they define the Superiour to a Law, and constitute no Power to Judge of his Excesses from that Law it is evident they reserve to themselves, not a Formall Authoritative Power, but a morall Power, such as they had originally before the Constitution of the Government; which must needs remaine, being not conveyed away in the Constitution.


Chap. III. Of the division of Monarchy into Elective and Successive.

Sect. 1.THe second division of Monarchy, which I intend to treat of, is that of Elective or Successive. Elective Monarchy is that, whereby the fundamentall constitution of the State the supreme power is conveyed but to the person of him whom they take for their Prince;Elective and Successive Monarchy what they are? the people reserving to themselves power, by men deputed by the same constitution to elect a new person on the decease of the former. Successive is, where by the fundamentall constitution of the State, the Soveraignty is conferred on one Prince; and in that one, as a root and beginning to his heires, after a forme and line of succession, constituted also by the fundamentals of that Government. In the first, the Peoples oath and contract of subiection extends but to one person: In the other, to the whole Race and Line of Successors; which continuing, the bond of subjection continues; or which failing, the people returne to their first liberty, of choosing a new person, or succession to be invested with Soveraignty.

Sect. 2.I doe conceive that in the first originall all Monarchy, yea any individuall frame of Government whatsoever, is elective: that is, is constituted, and drawes its force and right from the consent and choice of that Community over which it swayeth. And that triple distinction of Monarchy into that which is gotten by Conquest.All Monarchy whether originally from consent? Prescription, or Choice is, not of distinct parts unlesse by Choice be meant full and formall Choice: my reason is, because man being a voluntary agent and subiection being a morall act it doth essentially depend on consent so that a man may by force and extremity be brought under the power of another, as unreasonable creatures are, to be disposed of, and trampled on, whether they will or no: But a bond of subjection cannot be put on him, nor a right to claime Obedience and Service acquired, unlesse a man become bound by some act of his owne Will. For, suppose another, from whom I am originally free, be stronger then I, and so bring mee under his mercy doe I therefore sin if I doe not what he commands me? or can that act of violence passe into a morall title, without a morall principle?

Sect. 3.But this will be more manifest, if by induction I shew how other titles resolve into this. I will begin with that of divine institution. Saul and David were by the Secrament of anointing designed to the Kingdome, as it were by Gods owne hand;Monarchy by divine institution. which notwithstanding, they were not actually Kings till the Peoples consent established them therein: That unction was a manifestation of the appointment of God, and when it was made knowne to the People, I thinke it had the power of Precept to restraine the Peoples choice to that person; which if they had not done, they had resisted Gods ordinance. Yet they were not thereby actually endowed with Kingly power, but remained as private men, till the Peoples choice put them in actuall possession of that Power, which in Doves was not till after many yeares.

Sect. 4.Then for that of Usuage or Prescription; if any such did ever constitute a Monarchie, it was by vertue of an Universall consent by that Usuage and Prescription proved and implyed:Monarchy by prescription. For in a Popular state, where one Man in the Communitie, by reason of great estate, Wisdome, or other Perfection is in the eye of all the rest, all reverence him and his advice they follow: and the respect continues from the People to the house and family, for divers generations. In this case, subjection at first is arbitrary in the people; and if in time it become necessary, it is because their Custome is their Law; and its long continuance is equivalent to a formall Election: so that this Tenure and Right, if it be good and more then at pleasure, as it was at first, the considerate must needs ascribe it to a consent, and implicite choyce of the People.

Sect. 5.But the mayn Question is concerning Monarchy archieved by Conquest; where at first fight the Right seems gotten by the Sword, without the consent and Choyce of the People, yea against it. Conquest is either 1. Totall where a full Conquest is made, by a totall subduing a people to the Will of the Victor: or 2. Partiall,Monarchy by conquest. where an entrance is made by the Sword: But the People either because of the Right claymed by the Invader; or their unwillingnesse to suffer the Miseries of Warre, or their apparent inability to stand out in a way of Resistance, or some other consideration, submit to a composition and contract of subjection to the Invader. In this latter it is evident, the Soveraignes Power is from the Peoples consent; and the Government is such as the Contract and fundamentall agreement makes it to be, if it be the first Agreement, and the pretender hath no former Title which remaines in force, for then this latter is invalid, if it include not and amount to a relinquishing and disanulling of the Old. But the difficulty is concerning a full and meere Conquest; and of this I will speak my mind clearly. Such a Warre and Invasion of a People, which ends in a Conquest, 1. it is either upon the pretence or claim of a Title of Soveraignty over the People invaded: and then, if the pretender prevaile, it is properly no Conquest, but the vindication of a Title by force of Armes. And the Government is not Originall, but such as the Title is by which he claymes it. 2. Or it is by One who hath no challenge of Right descending to him to justifie his claim and Invasion of a People: Then if he subdue, he may properly be said to come to his Government by Conquest.

Whether conquest give a iust title?And there be who wholly condemne this title of Conquest as unlawfull, and take it for nothing else but a Nationall and publike robbery: so one of the Answerers to Doctor Ferne, saies in his p. 10. Conquest may give such a right as Plunderers use to take in houses they can waster.—— It is inhumane to talke of right of Conquest in a Civill, in a Christian State. But I cannot allow of so indefinite a Censure: rather I think the right of Conquest is such as the precedent Warre was: if that were lawfull, so is the Conquest: For a Prince may be invaded, or so farre injured by a neighbour People, or they may be set on such a pernicious enmitie against him and his people, that the safety of himselfe and people may compell to such a Warre, which warre if it end in Conquest, who can judge such Title unlawfull? Suppose then Conquest may be a lawfull way of acquisition: yet an immediate cause of right of Soveraignty; that is, of a Civill power of Government to which obedience is due, it cannot be: I say, an immediate cause, for a remote impulsive cause it oft is, but not an immediate formall cause; for that must ever be the consent of the people, whereby they accept of, and resigne up themselves to a Government, and then their Persons are morally bound, and not before. Thus far the force of conquest may goe; it may give a man title over, and power to possesse and dispose of the Countrey and Goods of the Conquered; yea, the Bodies and lives of the Conquered are at the Will and Pleasure of the Conquerour: But it still is at the Peoples choice to come into a morall condition of subiection or not. When they are thus at the mercy of the Victor, if to save life they consent to a condition of servitude or subiection, then that consent, oath, or covenant, which they in that extremity make, being in re licita, bindes them, and they owe morall Duty. But if they would rather suffer the utmost violence of the Conquerour, and will consent to no termes of subjection as Numantia in Spaine, and many other People have resolved; they die or remaine a free People. Be they captived or possessed at pleasure, they owe no duty, neither doe they sin in not obeying; nor doe they resist Gods ordinance, if at any time of advantage they use force to free themselves from such a violent possession: yea perhaps, if before by contract they were bound to another, they should sin if to avoid death or bondage they should sweare or covenant fralty to a Conquerour, and it were more noble and &illegible; to die in the service, and for the faith to their naturall Soveraigne. Thus I am perswaded it will appeare an uncontrolable truth in Policie, that the consent of the People, either by themselves or their Ancestors is the only mean in ordinary providence by which soveraignty is conferred on any Person or Family: neither can Gods ordinance be conveyed and People engaged in conscience by any other means.

Sect. 6.It hath been affirmed by some, that mixture and limitation is inconsistent to successive Monarchy; as if where ever Soveraignty is entailed to a succession, it must needs be absolute: But I must professe I cannot see how it can stand with truth: Rather I thinke, that both Elective and Hereditary Monarchy are indifferently capable of absolutenesse or limitation.Whether a Monarch by succission may not be limited? If a free, and not pre-ingaged People to any Government, by publike compact yeeld up themselves to a Person, to be commanded by his Will as their supreme Law, during his naturall life, and no longer, can it be denied but that he is an absolute, and yet Elective Monarch? unlesse you will say, he is not absolute, because he cannot by his Will, as by a Law, bind them to elect his sonne to succeed him, and change their Government into hereditary. But his being limited in this Clause doth not disparage his Soveraignty, or make his power of Government limited, because this belongs not to present Government, but is a meere provision for the future. Againe, if the power of Ruling according to a Law, be by consent conveyed to one Person, and his heires to succeed after him, how this should come to be absolute and the entailement should overthrow the constitution, I cannot imagine: If the whole latitude of power may be by a People made hereditary sure a proportion may as well; unlesse the limitation be such as includes a repugnancy to be perpetuall. Indeed this enstating of a succession makes that power irrevocable, during the continuance of that succession but it makes it neither greater nor lesse in the Successor then was in his Progenitors, from whom hee derives it.

Sect. 7.In a successive Monarchy the Successor holds by the originall Right of him who is the root of succession; and is de jure King the immediate instant after his Predecestors decease: Also the people are bound to him, though they never take any Oath to his person. For as he commands in vertue of the originall Right, so they are bound to obey by vertue of the originall Covenant, and nationall Contract of Subjection: the new oath taken either by King or People, is but a reviving of the old; that the Conscience of it by renewing might be the more fresh and vigorous: it neither gives any new power, nor addes or detracts from the old, unlesse by common agreement an alteration be made; and so the foundation in that clause is new, which cannot be without the content of both parties.


Chap. IIII. Of the Division of Monarchy into Simple and Mixed.

Sect. 1.THe third division is into Simple and Mixed. Simple is when the Government absolute or limited is so intrusted in the hands of one, that all the rest is by deputation from him; so that there is no authority in the whole Body but his,Simple and mixed Monarchy, what? or derived from him: And that One is either individually one Person, and then it is a simple Monarchy: Or one associate Body, chosen either out of the Nobility, whence the Government is called a simple Aristocracy: or out of the Community, without respect of birth or state, which is termed a simple Democracy. The supreme authority residing exclusively in one of these three, denominates the Government simple which over it be.

Now experience teaching People, that severall inconveniences are in each of those, which is avoided by the other: as aptnesse to Tyranny in simple Monarchy: aptnesse to destructive Factions in an Aristocracy: and aptnesse to Confusion and Tumult in a Democracy. As on the contrary, each of them hath some good which the others want, viz. Unity and strength in a Monarchy; Counsell and Wisedome in an Aristocracy; Liberty and respect of Common good in a Democracy. Hence the wisedome of men deeply seene in State matters guided them to frame a mixture of all three, uniting them into one Forme, that so the good of all might be enjoyed, and the evill of them avoyded. And this mixture is either equall, when the highest command in a State by the first Constitution of it is equally seated in all three; and then (if firme Union can be in a mixture of Equality) it can be called by the name of neither of them but by the generall stile of a Mixed State: or if there be priority of Order in one of the three, (as I thinke there must be or else there can be no Unity it may take the name of that which hath the precedency. But the firmer Union is, where one of the three is predominant and in that regard gives the denomination to the whole: So we call it a Mixed Monarchy, where the primity of share in the supreme power is in one.

Sect. 2.Now I conceive to the constituting of Mixed Monarchy (and so proportionately it may be said of the other.)What it is which constitutes a mixed Monarchy?

1. The Soveraigne power must be originally in all three, viz. If the composition be of all three so that one must not hold his power from the other,Pos. 1. but all equally from the fundamentall Constitution: for if the power of one be originall, and the other Derivative, it is no mixture, for such a Derivation of power to others is in the most simple Monarchy: Againe, the end of mixture could not be obteyned; for why is this mixture framed, but that they might confine each other from exorbitance, which cannot be done by a derivate power, it being unnaturall that a derived power should turne back, and set bounds to its owne beginning.

Pos. 2.2. A full equality must not be in the three estates, though they are all sharers in the Supreame power; for if it were so, it could not have any ground in it to denominate it a Monarchie, more then an Aristocracie or Democracie.

Pos. 3.3. A power then must be sought wherewith the Monarch must be invested, which is not so great as to destroy the mixture; nor so titular as to destroy the Monarchy; which I conceive may be in these particulars.

1. If he be the head and Fountaine of the power which governs and executes the established Lawes, so that both the other States as well conjunction as division, be his sworne subjects, and owe obedience to his commands, which are according to established Lawes.

2. If he hath a sole or chiefe power in capacitating and putting those persons or societies in such States and conditions, as whereunto such Supreme power by the foundations of the Government doth belong, and is annexed: so that though the Aristocratical and Democraticall power which is conjoyned to his, be not from him: yet the definement and determination of it to such persons is from him, by a necessary consecution.

3. If the power of convocating or causing to be put in existence, and dissolving such a Court or Meeting of the two other estates as is authoritative, be in him.

4. If his authority be the last and greatest though not the sole, which must establish and adde a consummatum to every Act. I say these or any of these put into one person makes that State Monarchicall, because the other, though they depend not on him quoad essentians et act as formales, but on the prime constitution of the Government, yet quoad existentiam et determinationem ad subject a, they doe.

The Supreme power being either the Legislative or the Gubernative. In a mixed Monarchy sometimes the mixture is the seate of the Legislative power, which is the chiefe of the two: The power of constituting officers for governing by those Lawes being left to the Monarch: Or else the Primacie of both these powers is jointly in all three: For if the Legislative be in one, then the Monarchy is not mixed but simple, for that is the Superiour, if that be in one, all else must needs be so too: By Legislative, I meane the power of making new Lawes, if any new be needfull to be added to the foundation: and the Authentick power of interpreting the old; For I take it, this is a branch of the Legislative and is as great, and in effect the same power.

Sect. 3.Every mixed Monarchy is limited: but it is not necessary that every limited should be mixed: For the Prince in a mixed Monarchy, were there no definement of him to a Law but onely this: that his Legislative acts have no validity without the allowance and joint authority of the other: this is enough to denominate it exactly a limited Monarchy: and so much it must have, if it be mixed. On the other side, if in the foundations of his Government he be restrained to to any Law besides his own Will, he is a limited Monarch, though that both the Legislative and Gubernative power (provided he exceed not those Lawes) be left in his owne hands: But then the Government is not mixed.

Sect. 4.Now concerning the extent of the Princes power, and the subjects duty in a mixed Monarchy, almost the same is to be said, which was before in a limited:How far the Princes power extends in a mixed Monarchy? for it is a generall rule in this matter: such as the Constitution of Government is, such is the Ordinance of God: such as the Ordinance is, such must our duty of subjection be. No Power can challenge an obedience beyond its owne measure; for if it might, we should destroy all Rules and differences of Government, and make all absolute and at pleasure. In every mixed Principality.

Assert. 1.First, Looke what Power is solely entrusted and committed to the Prince by the fundamentall Constitution of the State, in the due execution thereof all owe full subjection to him, even the other Estates, being but societies of his subjects bound to him by Oath of Allegeance as to their liege Lord.

Assert. 2.Secondly, those acts belonging to the power which is stated in a mixed Principle if either part of that Principle, or two of the three undertake to doe them it is invalid it is no binding Act; for in this case all three have a free Negative voice: and take away the priviledge of a Negative Voice, so that in case of refusall the rest have power to doe it without the third, then you destroy that Third, and make him but a Looker on: So that in every mixed Government, I take it, there must be a necessity of concurrence of all three Estates in the production of Acts belonging to that power, which is committed in common to them: Else suppose those Acts valid which are done by any major part, that is, any two of the three, then you put it in the power of any two, by a confederacy at pleasure to disanull the third, or suspend all its Acts, and make it a bare Cypher in Government.

Assert. 3.Thirdly, in such a composed State, if the Monarch invade the power of the other two, or run in any course tending to the dissolving of the constituted frame, they ought to employ their power in this case to preserve the State from ruine; yea that is the very end and fundamentall aime in constituting all mixed Policies: not that they by crossing and jarring should hinder the publike good; but that, if one exorbitate, the power of restraint and providing for the publike safety should be in the rest: and the power is put into divers hands, that one should counterpoize and keep even the other: so that for such other Estates, it is not onely lawfull to deny obedience and submission to illegall proceedings, as private men may, but it is their duty, and by the foundations of the Government they are bound to prevent dissolution of the established Frame.

Assert. 4.Fourthly, the Person of the Monarch, even in these mixed Formes, (as I said before in the limited) ought to be above the reach of violence in his utmost exorbitances: For when a People have sworne allegeance, and invested a Person or Line with Supremacy, they have made it sacred, and no abuse can devest him of that power, irrevocably communicated. And while he hath power in a mixed Monarchy, he is the Universall Soveraigne, even of the other limiting States: so that being above them, he is de jure exempt from any penall hand.

Assert. 5.Fifthly, that one inconvenience must necessarily be in all mixed Governments, which I shewed to be in limited Governments, there can be no Constituted, Legall, Authoritative Judge of the fundamentall Controversies arising betwixt the three Estates. If such doe arise, it is the fatall disease of these Governments, for which no salve can be prescribed; For the established being of such authority, would ipso facto overthrow the Frame, and turne it into absolutenesse: So that if one of these, or two, say their power is invaded, and the Government assaulted by the other, the Accused denying it, it doth become a controversie: of this question there is no legall Judge, it is a case beyond the possible provision of such a Government. The Accusing side must make it evident to every mans Conscience. In this case, which is beyond the Government, the Appeale must be to the Community, as if there were no Government; and as by Evidence mens Consciences are convinced, they are bound to give their utmost assistance. For the intention of the Frame in such States, justifies the exercise of any power, conducing to the safety of the Universality and Government established.


PART II. Of this particular MONARCHY.
Chap. I. Whether the Power wherewith our Kings are invested, be an Absolute, or Limited and Moderated Power?

Sect. 1.HAving thus far proceeded in generall, before we can bring home this to a stating of the great controversie, which now our sins, Gods displeasure, and evill turbulent men have raised up in our lately most flourishing but now most unhappy Kingdome. Wee must first looke into the Frame and Composure of our Monarchy; for till we fully are resolved of that, we cannot apply the former generall Truths, nor on them ground the Resolution of this ruining contention.

Concerning the Essentiall Composure of this Government, that it is Monarchicall, is by none to be questioned: but the enquiry must be about the Frame of it. And so there are seven great questions to be prosecuted.

Quest. 1. stated.First, whether it be a Limited Monarchy, or Absolute? Here the question is not concerning Power in the Exercise, but the Root and being of it: for none will deny but that the way of Government used, and to be used in this Realme, is a designed way: Onely some speake as if this Definement were an act of Grace from the Monarchs themselves, being pleased at the suit, and for the good of the People, to let their power run into act through such a course and current of Law: whereas, if they at any time shall thinke fit on great causes to vary from that way, and use the full extent of their power, none ought to contradict, or refuse to obey. Neither is it the question, Whether they sin against God if they abuse their power, and run out into acts of injury at pleasure, and violate those Lawes which they have by Publike Faith and Oath promised to observe; for none will deny this to be true, even in the most absolute Monarch in the world. But the point controverted is punctually this, Whether the Authority which is inherent in our Kings be boundlesse and absolute, or limited and determined, so that the acts which they doe, or command to be done without that compasse and bounds, be not onely sinfull in themselves, but invalid and non-authoritative to others?

Sect. 2.Now for the determining hereof, I conceive and am in my Judgement perswaded, that the Soveraignty of our Kings is radically and fundamentally limited,Assert. and not onely in the Use and Exercise of it: And am perswaded so on these grounds and Reasons.

First, Because the Kings Majesty himselfe,Reas. 1. who best knowes by his Councell the nature of his own power, sayes, thata the Law is the measure of his power: which is as full a concession of the thing as words can expresse. If it be the measure of it, then his power is limited by it; for the measure is the limits and bounds of the thing limited. And in his Answer to both the Houses concerning the Militia, speaking of the men named to him, sayes, If more power shall be thought sit to be granted to them, then by Law is in the Crowne it selfe, His Maiesty holds it reasonable, that the same be by some Law first vested in him, with power to transferre it to these persons, &c. In which passage it is granted that the Powers of the Crown are by Law, and that the King hath no more then are vested in him by Law.

Reas. 2.Secondly, because it is in the very Constitution of it mixed, as I shall afterwards make it appeare, then it is radically limited; for as I shewed before, every mixed Monarchy is limited, though not on the contrary: for the necessary connexion of other power to it, is one of the greatest limitations. A subordination of Causes doth not ever prove the supreme Cause of limited virtue; a co-ordination doth alwayes.

Reas. 3.Thirdly, I prove it from the ancient, ordinary, and received denominaitons; for the Kings Majesty is called our Liege, that is, Legall Soveraigne; and we his Liege that is his Legall Subjects: what doe these names argue, but that his Soveraignty and our subjection is legall that is, restrained by Law?

Reas. 4.Fourthly, had we no other proofe, yet that of Prescription were sufficient: In all ages, beyond record the Lawes and Customes of the Kingdome have been the Rule of Government: Liberties have been stood upon, and Grants thereof, with limitations of Royall power, made and acknowledged by Magna Charta, and other publike and solemne acts; and no Obedience acknowledged to be due but that which is according to Law, nor claimed but under some pretext and title of Law.

Reas. 5.Fifthly, the very Being of our Common and Statute Lawes, and our Kings acknowledging themselves bound to governe by them, doth prove and prescribe them Limited: for those Lawes are not of their sole composing nor were they established by their sole Authority, but by the concurrence of the other two Estates: so that to be confined to that which is not meerly their owne, is to be in a limited condition.

Pleaders for defensive armes Sect. 2. & 4.Some there be which have lately written on this subject, who take another way to prove our Government limited by Law, viz. by denying all absolute Government to be lawfull; affirming that Absolute Monarchy is not at all Gods Ordinance, and so no lawfull power secured from resistance. What is their ground for this? God allowes no man to rule as he lift, nor puts mens lives in the pleasure of the Monarch: It is a power arbitrary and injurious. But I desire those Authors to confider, that in absolute Monarchy there is not a resignation of men to any Will or lift, but to the reasonable Will of the Monarch, which having the Law of reason to direct it, is kept from injurious acts. But see for defence of this Government, Part 1. cap. 2.

Sect. 3.Having set downe those Reasons on which my Judgement is setled on this side, I will confider the maine Reasons wherby some have endeavoured to prove this Government to be of an absolute nature, and will shew their invalidity. Many Divines perhaps inconfiderately, perhaps wittingly for self ends, have beene of late yeares strong Pleaders for Absolutenesse of Monarchicall Power in this Land; and pressed Obedience on the Consciences of People in the utmost extremity, which can be due in the most absolute Monarchy in the world; but I seldome or never heard or read them make any difference of Powers but usually bring their proofes from those Scriptures, where subjection is commanded to the higher Powers, and all resistence of them forbidden and from Examples taken out of the manner of the government of Israel and Judah: as if any were so impious to contradict those truths, and they were not as well obeyed in Limited Government as in Absolute; or as if Examples taken out of one Government do alwayes hold in another, unlesse their aime were to deny all distinction of Governments, and to hold all absolute, who have any where the supreme power conveyed to them.

Among these, I wonder most at that late discourse of Dr. Ferne, who in my Judgement avoucheth things inconsistent, and evidently contradictory one to the other: For in his Preface he acknowledges our Obedience to be limited and circumscribed by the Lawes of the Land, and accordingly to be yeelded or denied to the higher Power; and that he is at much against an absolute Power in the King and to raise him to an arbitrary way of Government, as against resistence on the Subject’s part: also, that his power is limited by Law, Sect. 5. Yet on the other side he affirmes, That the King holds his Crown by conquest; that it is descended to him by three Conquests, Sect. 2. that we even our Senate of Parliament hath not so much plea for resistence as the ancient Romane Senate had under the Romane Emperours, whose power we know was absolute, Sect, 2. that in Monarchy the judgement of many is reduced to one: that Monarchy settles the chief power and finall Judgment in one, Sect. 5. what is this but to confesse him limited: and yet to maintain him absolute?

Arguments on the contrary dissolved.But let us come to the Arguments. First, say they, our Kings came to their right by Conquest; yea, saies the Dr. by three Conquests: He meanes the Saxons, Danes, and Normans, as appears afterwards: Therefore their right is absolute. Here, that they may advance themselves, they care not though it be on the ruine of publique liberty, by bringing a whole Nation into the condition of conquered slaves: But to the Argument. 1. Suppose the Antecedent true, the Consequution is not alwaies true; for as is evident before in the first Part. All Conquest doth not put the Conqueror into an absolute right. He may come to a right by Conquest: but not sole Conquest; but a partiall, occasioning a Right by finall Agreement; and then the right is specificated by that fundamentall agreement: Also he may by sword prosecute a claime of another nature: and in his war intend only an acquiring of that claimed right, and after conquest rest in that: Yea farther, he may win a Kingdome meerly by the Sword and enter on it by right of Conquest: yet considering that right of conquest hath too much of force in it to be safe and permanent; he may thinke conquest the best meane of getting a Kingdome, but not of holding, and in wisdome for himselfe and posterity, gaine the affections of the people by deserting that Title, and taking a new by Politique agreement, or descend from that right by fundamentall grants of liberties to the people, and limitations to his own power: but these things I said in effect before, in the first part, only here I have recalled them, to shew what a non sequitur there is in the Argument. But that which I chiefly intend, is to shew the infirmity or falsehood of the Antecedent: it is an Assertion most untrue in it selfe; and pernitious to the State: Our Princes professe no other way of comming to the Crown, but by right of succession to rule free subjects in a legall Monarchy. All the little shew of proofe these Assertors have, is from the root of succession: So William commonly called the Conquerour. For that of the Saxons was an expulsion not a Conquest, for as our Histories record, They comming into the Kingdome drove out the Britaines, and by degrees planted themselves under their Commanders; and no doubt continued the freedome they had in Germany: unles we should thinke that by conquering they lost their own Liberties to the Kings for whom they conquered and expelled the British into Wales. Rather I conceive, the Originall of the subjects libertie was by those our fore-fathers brought out of Germany: Where, as Tacitus reports,Tacit. de Morib. German. Sect. 3. & 5. nec Regibus infinita aut libera potestas: Their Kings had no absolute but limited power: and all weighty matters were dispatched by generall meetings of all the Estates. Who sees not here the antiquity of our Liberties and frame of Government? so they were governed in Germany, and so here to this day, for by transplanting themselves they changed their soyl; not their manners and Government: Then, that of the Danes was indeed a violent Conquest; and, as all violent rules, it lasted not long; when the English expelled them they recovered their Countrey and Liberties together. Thus it is clear, the English Libertie remained to them till the Norman Invasion, notwithstanding that Danish interruption. Now for Duke William, I know nothing they have in him but the barestile of Conqueror, which seems to make for them: The very truth is, and everie intelligent reader of the Historie of those times will attest it, that Duke William pretended the grant and gift of King Edward who died without children: and he came with forces into this Kingdome, not to Conquer but make good his Title against his enemies: his end of entring the Land was not to gaine a new absolute Title but to vindicate the old limited one whereby the English Saxon: Kings his Predecessors held this Kingdome. Though his Title was not so good as it should be,&illegible; Britan. Norma. yet it was better then Harolds, who was onely the Sonne of Goodwyn, Steward of King Edwards house; Whereas William was Cousen to Emma mother to the said King Edward; by whom he was adopted; and by solemne promise of King Edward was to succeed him: Of which promise Harola himselfe became surety, and bound by oath to see it performed: Here was a faire Title, especially Edgar Atholing the right Heire being of tender age, and dis-affected by the people. Neither did he proceed to a full Conquest, but after Harola who usurped the Crown was slain in battle, and none to succeed him, the Throne being void, the people chose rather to submit to William and his Title, then endure the hazzard of ruining war, by opposing him, to set up a new King: It is not to be imagined, that such a Realme as England could be conquered by so few, in such a space, if the peoples voluntary acceptance of him and his claime had not facilitated and shortned his undertaking. Thus we have it related in Mr. &illegible; that before Harola usurped the Crown, most men thought it the wisest Policie to set the Crown on Williams head, that by performing the Oath and promise, a Warre might be prevented: And that Harola by assuming the Crown, provoked the whole Clergy and Ecclesiasticall State against him: and we know how potent in those daies the Clergy were in State affaires. Also that after one battle fought wherein Harola was slain, he went to London, was received by the Londoners, and solemnly inaugurated King as unto whom by his own saying the Kingdome was by Gods Providence appointed, and by vertue of a gift from his Lord and Cousen King Edward, the glorious, granted: so that after that battell the remainder of the war was dispatched by English forces and Leaders. But suppose he did come in a Conqueror, yet he did not establish the Kingdome on those termes, but on the old Lawes, which he reteyned and authorized for himselfe and his Successors to governe by. Indeed after his settlement in the Kingdome, some Norman Customes he brought in, and to gratify his souldiers dispossessed many English of their estates, dealing in it too much like a Conqueror: but the triall by twelve men, and other fundamentalls of Government, wherein the English freedome consists, he left untouched, which have remained till this day. On the same Title he claimed and was inaugurated, was he King which was a title of rightfull succession to Edward: therfore he was indeed King not as Conqueror, but as Edwards Successor, and on the same right as he and his Predecessors held the Crowne. As also by the grant of the former Lawes and forme of Government, he did equivalently put himselfe and successors into the State of legall Monarchs, and in that Tenure have all the Kings of this Land held the Crown till this day, when these men would take up, and put a Title of Conquest upon them, which never was claimed or made use of by him who is the first root of their succession.

Sect. 4.Another reason which they produce is the successive nature of this Monarchy: for with them, to be elective and limited, and to be successive and absolute, are equipollent: They conceive it impossible that a Government should be Hereditary and not absolute: But I have enough made it appear, Part 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. That succession doth not prove a Monarchie absolute from limitation, though it proves it absolution from interruption and discontinuance, during the being of that succession to which it is defined. And that which they object that our Kings are actually so before they take the Oath of governing by Law, and so they would be, did they never take that Oath; wherefore it is no Limitation of their royall power, is there also answered in the next Sect. and that so fully, that no more need be said. The same Law which gives the King his Crown immediatly upon the decease of his Predecessor, conveyes it to him with the same Determinations and Prerogatives annexed, with which his Progeintors enjoyed it, so that he entring on that Originall Right, his subjects are bound to yeild obedience, before they take any Oath: And he is bound to the Lawes of the Monarchy, before he actually renewes the bond by any Personall Oath. There is yet another argument usually brought to this purpose, taken from the Oath of Allegiance: but of that I shall have occasion to speake hereafter.


Chap. II. Supposing it be in the Platforme limited, Wherein, and how far forth it is limited and defined?Quest. 2.

Pos. 1.I Conceive it fundamentally limited in five particulars. First, in the whole latitude of the Nomotheticall power; so that their power extends not to establish any Act, which hath the Being and state of a Law of the Land: nor give an authenticke sense to any Law of doubtfull and controverted meaning, solely and by themselves, but together with the concurrent Authority of the two other Estates in Parliament.

Pos. 2.Secondly, in the Governing Power, there is a confinement to the Fundamentall Common Lawes, and to the superstructive Statute Lawes, by the former concurrence of Powers enacted, as to the Rule of all their Acts and Executions.

Pos. 3.Thirdly, in the power of constituting Officers, and meanes of governing; not in the choice of Persons for that is intrusted to his Judgement, for ought I know, but in the constitution of Courts of Judicature: For as hee cannot Judge by himselfe or Officers, but in Courts of Justice; so those Cours of Justice must have a constitution by a concurrence of the three Estates: They must have the same power to constitute them, as the Lawes which are dispensed in them.

Pos. 4.Fourthly, in the very succession; for though succession hath been brought as a Medium to prove the Absolutenesse of this Government yet if it be more throughly considered, it is rather a proofe of the contrary; and every one who is a successive Monarch is so far limited in his power, that he cannot leave it to whom he pleases, but to whom the Fundamentall Law concerning that Succession hath designed it. And herein though our Monarchy be not so far limited as that of France is said to be, where the King cannot leave it to his Daughter, but to his Heire male, yet restrained it is; so that should he affect another more, or judge another fitter to succeed, yet he cannot please himselfe in this, but is limited to the next Heire borne, not adopted or denominated: which was the case ’twixt Queene Mary and the Lady Jane.

Pos. 5.Lastly, in point of Revenue wherein their Power extendeth not to their Subjects Estates; by Taxes and Impositions to make their owne what they please, as hath been acknowledged by Magna Charta, and lately by the Petition of Right, the case of Ship-money, Conduct-money, &c. Nor, as I conceive, to make an Alienation of any Lands, or other Revenues annexed by Law to the Crowne. I meddle not with personall limitations, whereby Kings, as well as private men, may limit themselves by Promise and Covenant, which being particular, bind onely themselves; but of those which are radicall, and have continued during the whole current of succession from unknowne times. Other limitations, it is likely, may be produced by those who are skilfull in the Lawes: but I beleeve they will be such as are reducible to some of these, which I take to be the principall and most apparent limitations of this Monarchy, and are a most convincing induction to prove my Assertion in the former Chapter, That this Monarchy, in the very Mold and Frame of it, is of limited constitution.


Chap. III. Whether it be of a Simple or Mixed Constitution?Quest. 3.

Sect. 1.WHen the Government is simple, when mixed: also where the mixture must be, which denominates a mixed Government, is explained Part 1. Cap. 3. Now I conceive it a cleare and undoubted Truth, that the Authority of this Land is of a compounded and mixed nature in the very root and constitution thereof. And my judgement is established on these grounds.

Reas. 1.First, It is acknowledged to be a Monarchy mixed with Aristocracy in the house of Peeres, and Democracy in the house of Commons.Answer to the 19. Proposit. Now (as before was made appeare in the first Part) it is no mixture which is not in the Root and Supremacy of Power: for though it have a subordination of inferiour Officers, and though the Powers inferiour be seated in a mixed subject, yet that makes it not a mixed Government; for it is compatible to the simplest in the world, to have subordinate mixtures.

Reas. 2.Secondly, that Monarchy where the legislative power is in all three, is in the very Root and Essence of it compounded and mixed of those three; for that is the height of power, to which the other parts are subsequent and subservient: so that where this resideth in a mixed subject that is in three distinct concurrent Estates, the consent and concourse of all most free, and none depending on the will of the other, that Monarchy is in the most proper sense and in the very modell of it of a mixed constitution: but such is the state of this Monarchy, as appeares in the former question, and is self-apparent.

Reas. 3.Thirdly, that Monarchy, in which three Estates are constituted, to the end that the power of one should moderate and restrain from excesse the power of the other, is mixed in the root and essence of it: but such is this, as is confessed in the answere to the said Propositions. The truth of the major will appeare, if we consider how many wayes provision may be made in a Politicall Frame to remedy and restraine the excesses of Monarchy. I can imagine but three wayes. First, by constituting a legall power above it, that it may be regulated thereby, as by an over-ruling power: Thus wee must not conceive of our two houses of Parliament, as if they could remedy the exorbitances of the Prince by an Authority superiour to his, for this were to subordinate him to the two Houses, to set a superiour above the Soveraigne, that is, to destroy the being of his Monarchicall power. Secondly, by an originall conveyance to him of a limited and legall power so that beyond it he can doe no potestative act; yet constituting no formall legall power to refraine or redresse his possible exorbitances; here is limitation without mixture of another constituted power: As the former of these overthrowes the power of the Soveraigne, so this makes no provision for the iudemnity of the people. Thirdly, now the never enough to be admired wisedome of the Architects and Contrivers of the frame of Government in this Realme (who ever they were) have found a third way, by which they have conserved the Soveraignty of the Prince; and also made an excellent provision for the Peoples freedome, by constituting two Estates of men, who are for their condition Subjects, and yet have that interest in the Government, that they can both moderate and redresse the excesses and illegalities of the Royall power, which (I say) cannot be done, but by a mixture, that is, by putting into their hands a power to meddle in acts of the highest function of Government; a power not depending on his will, but radically their owne, and so sufficient to moderate the Soveraignes power.

Sect. 2.Now what can reasonably be said in opposition to these grounds, proving a fundamentall mixture, I cannot devise. Neither indeed is a mixture in the Government denied by the greatest Patrons of irresistibility; onely such a mixture they would faine make it, which might have no power of positive resistence. I will therefore set down what they probably may or do object to this purpose, and will shew the invalidity thereof.

Object. 1.First, this mixture seems not to be of distinct powers but of a Power & a Councell; authority in the Prince to give power to Acts, and counsell in the two Houses to advise and propose wholesom Acts; as if the royall power alone did give life to the Law: onely he is defined in this power, that he cannot animate any Act to the being of a Law, but such as is proposed unto him by this great and Legislative Councell of Parliament. Sol, This were probable, supposing the Parliament were onely in the nature of a Counsell; but we know it is also a Court, the High Court of Parliament: Now it is evident that a Court is the seat and subject of Authority and power, and not barely of counsell and advice.

Object. 2.Secondly, the two Houses together with the King, are the supreme Court of the Kingdome; but taken divisely from the King, it is no Court, and consequently hath no power. Sol. Suppose them no entire Court divided from the King, yet they are two Estates of the three which make up the supreme Court; so that they have a power and authority, though not complete and sufficing to perfect an Act, without the concourse of the third: For it appeares by the Acts of that Court, that every of the three Estates hath a Legislative power in it; every Act being enacted by the Kings most excellent Majesty, and by the Authority of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament.

Sect. 3.Thirdly, they have an authority, but in subordination to the King and derived from him, as his Parliament. Indeed this is a maine Question, and hath very weighty Arguments on both sides, viz. Whether the authority of both the Houses be a subordinate authority,Object. 3. and derived from the King as its originall? Three Reasons seeme strong for the affirmative: First, because it is his Parliament, so called and acknowledged: If his Court, then the power whereby they are a Court is his power,Whether the authority of the two Houses be derived from the King? derived from him, as the power of other Courts is. Secondly, because he hath the power of calling and dissolving it. Thirdly, because he is acknowledged in the Oaths of Allegeance and Supremacy to be the Head, and of supreme authority in the Kingdome, and all subject to him.

Treatise entitituled, A fuller Answer to Dr. Ferne.And whereas some make answere that he is Singulis major, but &illegible; minor, so the Answerer to Doctor &illegible;, I wonder that the Proposition of the Observator, that the King is &illegible; minor, should be so much exploded. Every member &illegible; is a subject, but all &illegible; in their houses are not: And hee sayes simply, the Houses are co-ordinate to the King, nor subordinate; that the Lords &illegible; Comites, or Peeres, implies in Parliament a co-ordinative society with his Majesty in the Government. I conceive this Answerer to avoid one extreme falls on another; for this is a very overthrow of all Monarchy, and to reduce all Government to Democracy; For looke where the apex &illegible; in there is the Government. Also it is against Common Reason: For the King, is he not King of the Kingdome? and what is the Kingdome but all united? all the particulars knit together in one body politick? so that if he be King of the Kingdome, he is &illegible; major too; for the King is major, and the Kingdome is the united universe of the People. Thus those expressions are some of them false, some though secundum quid true; yet spoken simply, and in that manner, are scandalous and incompatible to Monarchy. Thus you see what may be said on the one side, to prove the King to be the originall of all power, even of that which is in the Houses of Parliament assembled.

On the other side are as weighty Arguments to prove the contrary, viz. That the two Houses authority is not dependent, nor derived from the Royall power. First, the authority of the Houses being Legislative, is the supreme, and so cannot bee derived. Three concurrent Powers producing one supreme act, as con-cause, joint causes of the same highest effect cannot have a subordination among themselves in respect of that casualty; it not being imaginable how a power can cause the supreme effect, and yet be a subordinate and derived power. Secondly, the end of constituting these two Estates being the limiting and preventing the excesses of the third, their power must not be totally dependent and derived from the third, for then it were unsuitable for the end for which it was ordained: For to limit an Agent by a power subordinate and depending on himself, is all one as to leave him at large without any limitation at all. Thirdly, that which hath beene spoken of a mixed Monarchy doth fully prove that the two other powers which concurre with the Monarch, to constitute the mixture, must not be altogether subordinate to it, and derived from it. I must professe these Reasons to prevaile with me, that I cannot conceive how the authority of the two Houses can in the whole being of it, be a dependent and derived power.

Sect. 4.That we may find out the truth amidst this potent contradiction of both sides, recourse must be had to the Architecture of this Government, whereof I must declare my self to be so great an Admirer, that what ever more then humane wisedom had the contriving of it, whether done at once, or by degrees found out and perfected, I conceive it unparalleld for exactnesse of true policy in the whole world;Resolution of the Question. such a care for the Soveraignty of the Monarch, such a provision for the liberty of the People, and that one may bee justly allayed, and yet consist without impeachment of the other, that I wonder how our Forefathers in those rude unpolished times could attain such an accurate composure. First then suppose a people, either compelled to it by conquest, or agreeing to it by free consent, Nobles and Commons set over themselves by publike compact one Soveraigne, and resigne up themselves to him and his heires, to be governed by such and such Fundamentall Lawes: there’s a supremacy of power set up, though limited to one course of exercise. Secondly, then because in all Governments after cases will come, it requiring an addition of Lawes, suppose them covenanting with their Soveraigne, that if cause be to constitute any other Lawes, hee shall not by his sole power doe that worke, but they reserve at first, or afterwards it is granted them (which is all one) a hand of concurrence therein, that they will be bound by no Lawes, but what they joyne with him in the making of. Thirdly, because though the Nobles may personally convene, yet the Commons (being so many) cannot well come together by themselves to the doing of such a worke, it be also agreed, that every Corporation of the Commons shall have power to depute one or more to be for the whole in this publike legislative businesse; that so the Nobles by themselves, the Commons by their Deputies assembling, there may be representatively the whole body, having Commission to execute that reserved authority for establishing new Lawes. Fourthly, because the occasion and need of making new Lawes, and authentick expounding the old, would not be constant and perpetuall, and it would carry an appearance of a Government in which were three Heads and chiefe Powers, they did not establish these Estates to be constantly existent, but occasionally, as the causes for which they were ordained should emerge and happen to be. Fifthly, because a Monarchy was intended and therefore a Supremacy of power (as farre as possible) must be reserved for one, it was concluded that these two Estates should be Assemblies of his Subjects, sworne to him, and all former Lawes; the new, which by agreement of Powers should be enacted, were to be his Lawes, and they bound to obey him in them as soone as established: And being supposed that he who was to governe by the Lawes, and for the furtherance of whose Government the new Lawes were to be made, should best understand when there was need, and the assembling and dissolving the two Estates meeting, was a power of great priviledge, it was put into the Princes hand by writ to convocate and bring to existence, and to adjourne and dismisse such meetings Sixthly, in processe of time Princes not caring much to have their Government looked into, or to have any power in act but their own, took advantage of this power of convocating those Estates, and did more seldome then need required make use of it; whereon provision was made, and a time set within which an Assembly of Parliament was to be had. Now when you have made these suppositions in your minde, you have the very modell and platforme of this Monarchy, and we shall easily find what to answer to the arguments before produced on either side. For first it is his Parliament, because an assembly of his subjects, convocated by his Writ, to be his Councell, to assist him in making Lawes for him to govern by: yet not his, as other Courts are altogether deriving their whole authority from the fulnesse which is in him. Also his power of assembling and dissolving proves him thus far above them, because in their existence they depend on him; but their power and authority quoad specificationem, the being and kind of it, is from originall constitution: for they expect no Commission and authority from him, more then for their meeting and reducing into existence; but existing they worke according to the priviledges of their constitution, their acts proceeding from their conjunct authority with the Kings, not from its subordination to the Kings. The oath of Allegeance binds them, and respects them as his subjects, to obey him, governing according to established Lawes: it supposes and is built upon the foundations of this Government, and must not be interpreted to overthrow then; he is thereby acknowledged to be supreme so far as to rule them by Lawes already made; not so far as to make Lawes without them, so that it is no derogation to their power; and I beleeve of these things none can make any question. Therein consists the accurate Judgement of the Contrivers of this Forme they have given so much into the hands of the soveraign as to make him truly a Monarch; and they have reserved so much in the hands of the two Estates, as to enable them to preserve their owne liberty.


Chap. IIII. How farre forth it is mixed; and what parts of the Power are referred to a mixed Principle?Quest. 4.

I Shall be the briefer in this, because an answer to it may be easily collected out of the precedent Questions: for he who knowes how farre this Government is limited, will soon discerne how farre it is mixed, for the Limitation is mostly affected by the mixture:Three points of mixture. but distinctly, I conceive that there are three parts of the power referred to the joint concourse of all three Estates: So that either of them not consenting or suspending its influence the rest cannot reduce that power ordinarily and legally into act.

1.The first is the Nomotheticall power, understanding by it the power of making, and authentick expounding Lawes, so that I believe an act cannot have the nature and forme of a Law of the Land, if it proceed from any one, or two of these, without the positive concurrence of the third.

2.Secondly, The power of imposing taxes and payments on mens estates: that the King by himself cannot assume mens properties by requiring impositions not granted him by Law, is often contested: And that the other Estates cannot doe it by themselves, I conceive it as unquestionable: For it were strange to give that to the secondary and assisting Powers, which is denied to the Soveraigne and principall. It it be objected that every Corporation electing Deputes, and authorizing them to be vice totius Communitatis, do thereby grant them power, and entrust them as to make laws to bind them, so to dispose of any part of their estate, either by rate or payment for the publique good: I answer, that they are by that deputation enabled as for one, so for the other; that is, according to the fundamentall usage of the Kingdome, that is, by the joint consent of the other estates, for though the house of Commons is chosen by the people, and they represent the people, yet the representation doth not give them a power which was not in the people. Now the people have no power to doe an act which either directly, or by consequence doth put it in the will and pleasure of any one or two of the Estates, to overthrow the other. But this power of opening and shutting the Purse of the Kingdome is such a power, that if it be in one or two of the Estates, without the third, then they by that power might necessitate that other to doe any act, or disable it from its owne defence. This and the Legislative power have such a neernesse, that they cannot be divided, but must be in the same subject: this is so great a power, that put it absolutely in any Estate single, you make that Estate in effect absolute, making the rest dependent and beholding to it for their subsistence.

3.Thirdly, the power of dispatching the affaires of the Kingdome which are of greatest difficulty and weight, the ardua regni, which the Writ for convocating the other Estates doth mention, supposing thereby that such difficulties are not to be dispatched by the power of one alone; for if they were, why then are the two other convocated to be assisting? I acknowledge many matters of great moment may be done by the Regall power, and in such case it may be said, that the other Estates are gathered ad &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; that the advise and sense of the Community may be for direction. But I conceive there be two sorts of affaires, which ought not to be transacted without the concurrence of all three. First, such as concerne the publike safety and weale, so far as stable detriment or advantage comes to the whole body by the well or ill carriage thereof; for then there is the same reason as in making new Lawes: For why was not the power of making any new Lawes left in the hands of one, but reserved for the concurrence of all three? save because the end of the Architects was, that no new thing which was of so much concernment as the stable good and dammage of the Kingdome, should be introduced without the consent and advice of the whole: so that if any businesse be of that moment, that it is equipollent to a Law in the publike interest, it should be managed by such an authority and way as that is. Secondly, such as introduce a necessity of publike charge, be it matter of War or else, if to the effecting of it the Purse of the Kingdome be required, it is evident that it ought to be done by the concurrence of all, because they onely jointly (as appeares before) have power to impose a publike charge on the estates of men. And it were all one to put the power of our estates in the hands of one, as to put the power of such undertakings in his sole hands, which of necessity bring after them an engagement of publike expence.


Chap. V. How far forth the two Estates may oppose and resist the will of the Monarch?Quest. 5.

Sect. 1.THis Question is in the generall already handled in the first Part, so that it will be easie to draw those Answers there to this particular here: Therefore conformably to what I then affirmed, I will answere this Question by divers Positions.

Pos. 1.First, the Monarch working according to his power not exceeding the Authority which God and the Lawes have conferred on him, is no way to be opposed either by any or all his Subjects, but in conscience to Gods ordinance obeyed. This is granted on all sides.

Pos. 2.Secondly, if the will and command of the Monarch exceed the limits of the Law, it ought for the avoidance of scandall and offence be submitted to, so it be not contrary to Gods Law, nor bring with it such an evill to our selves, or the publike, that we cannot be accessary to it by obeying. This also will find no opposition. Disobedience in light cases, in which we are not bound, makes an appearance of slighting the power, and is a disrespect to the person of the Magistrate. Therefore Christ, to avoyd such offense, would pay tribute, though he tells Peter, He was free, and need not have done it.

Pos. 3.Thirdly, if hee command a thing which the Law gives him no authority to command, and it be such as would bee inconvenient to obey, in this case obedience may lawfully be denied: This also findes allowance from them which stand most for royall power. Doctor Ferne in his Preface acknowledges obedience to be limited and circumscribed by the established Lawes of the Land, and accordingly to bee yeelded or denied. And Sect. 1. sayes he, We may and ought to deny obedience to such commands of the Prince as are unlawfull by the Law of God, yea by the established Laws of the land. Here he sayes more then we say; yea more then should be said, as appeares in the second Position: it is not universally true, that we ought.

Pos. 4.Fourthly, if he exceed the limits of the Law. and proceed in courses illegall, meanes there are which it is agreed upon the Subjects may use to reduce him to legall Government; so much Doctor Ferne allowes Sect. 4. Cries to God, Petition to the Prince, Deniall of Obedience, Deniall of Subsidie, &c.

Pos. 5.Fifthly but the point in controversie is about positive and forcible resistance, the lawfulnesse of which some doe utterly deny and others doe as confidently maintaine: but yet this point might be brought to a narrower state then in the confused handling of it, it usually is: by distinguishing twix’t forceable resistence used against the Kings own person, or against inferiour Officers and Instruments advising to, or executing the illegall commands.

Sect. 2.For the first, as I have before expressed my selfe, force ought not to be used against the person of the Soveraigne, on any pretence whatever, by any or all his subjects; even in limited and mixed Monarchies: for if they be truly Monarchs, they are irrevocably invested with Soveraignty, which sets their persons above all lawfull power and force. Also the Soveraign power being so conferred on that person: The person and power cannot be really sundred, but the force which is used to the one, must also violate the other: for power is not in the Soveraigne as it is in inferiour Officers: as water is otherwise in the spring then in the channells, and pipes deriving it: It is not inseperably in them, and therfore they offending force may be used against them without violation of the Ordinance of Authority. These Arguments prove it unlawfull in any: That which the Dr. brings, I approve as strong against all private force, where he allowes defence against the person of the Prince himselfe, so farre as to ward his blowes, but not to returne blowes, no though for naturall defence: because the Common-Wealth is concerned in his person, Sect. 2. And to divert a private evill by inducing a publique, is unjust and unlawfull: so that for this point of force against the person of the Prince: I thinke there ought to be no contention. If any have bin so rash to hold it lawfull on these grounds, that the whole Kingdome is above him because they make him King, and that by miscarriage he may make a forfeiture, and so lay himselfe open to force: I do iudge these grounds very insufficient: unles the Kingdome reserve a superiority to it self, or there be a fundamentall clause of forfeiture on specified causes; and then it is not properly a Monarchy: but all this hath been already handled in the generall Part.

Secondly, for Instruments of oppression of publique liberty if the wrong be destructive, and no other meanes of prevention, but force, be left; I am perswaded it may be used, and positive resistence made against them; And if I find any contradiction from the most rigid Patrones of Royalty, it must be only in this point. And here I must complaine of the indistinct dealing of that Doctor in this matter; who mingleth both these points together: and scarce speakes any thing to resolve mens consciences in this: But speakes either in generall, or else of force against the Princes owne person: Whereas I thinke, the case which sticks most on the conscience at this time, is this latter: Of opposing, mis-leading and mis-imployed subjects, which he speaks very little to. Nay, he seems to me, after all his disclaiming of resistence, to come home to us, and though sparingly, yet to assent to lawfullnes of resistence in this point. For Sect. 2. speaking of Devids guard of armed men: He saies. It was to secure his person against the cut-throats of Saul, if sent to take away his life: He meanes to secure it by force, for Souldiers are for force: He meanes no negative securing by flight, for that may be done even against Saul himselfe: but he speaks of such a securing, which might only be against cut-throats. So then he grants securing by force against these: But they went on Sauls command, and mostly with his presence. Againe, in the instance of Elisha, he seemes to acknowledge lawfullnesse of personall defence against the sudden and illegall assaults of Messengers, he means by force, for he speaks of such which he will not allow in publique, which can be understood of none, but by force: But it appears the Doctor in his whole discourse hath avoided this point of resistence of mis-imployed subjects; which yet is the alone point which would have given satisfaction: for before it appeares, we agree in all the rest, and in this too for ought I know, he having not distinctly said any thing against it.

Sect. 3.Now concerning this case of forceable resistence of inferiour persons mis-imployed to serve the illegall destructive commands of the Prince. I will doe two things.Whether resistence of Instruments of will be lawfull? 1. I will maintaine my Assertion by convincing Arguments. 2. I will shew the invalidity of what is said against it.

Assert. 1.This then is my Assertion: The two Estates in Parliament may lawfully by force of Armes resist any persons or number of persons advising or assisting the King in the performance of a command illegall and destructive to themselves, or the publique.

Arg. 1.1. Because that force is lawfull to be used for the publique conservation which is no resistence of the Ordinance of God; for that is the reason condemning the resistence of the Powers: Now this is no resistence of Gods Ordinance: For by it neither the person of the Soveraigne is resisted, nor his power: Not his person, for we speak of Agents imployed, not of his own person: Nor his power; For the measure of that, in our Government, is acknowledged to be the Law: And therefore he cannot confer Authority to any beyond Law: so that those Agents deriving no Authority from him: are meere Instruments of his Will: Unauthorized persons; in their assaults Robbers, and, as Dr. Ferne calls them, Cut-throats. If the case be put, What if the Soveraigne himselfe in person be present with such Assaylants, joining his personall assistence in the execution of his Commands? It is much to be lamented, that the will of the Prince should be so impetuous in any subverting Act, as to hazzard his own person in the prosecution of it. Yet supposing such a case, all councells and courses must be taken, that no violence be offered to his person, and Profession of none intended: But no reason the presence of his person should priviledge ruining Instruments from suppression, and give them an immunity to spoil and destroy subjects, better themselves; His person being secured from wrong; His power cannot be violated in such an Act, in which none of it can be conferred on the Agents And sure David, though he avoided laying hands or using any violence against the person of Saul, and on no extremity would have done it: Yet for the Cut-throats about him, if no other means would have secured him, he would have rescued himselfe by force from their outrage: Though Saul was in their company: Else what intended he by all that force of Souldiers: And his enquiry of God at Keilah: by which it is plain, He had an intent to have kept the place by force, if the people would have stuck to him: Neither is it to the purpose which the Dr. saies, Sect. 2. That his example was extraordinary, because he was anointed and designed to succeed Saul, for that being but a designation, did not exempt him from the duty of subjection for the present, or lessen it, as is plain by the great conscience he made of not touching Saul: But he knew it was one thing to violate Sauls Person and Power, and another to resist those Instruments of Tyranny, the Cut-throats which were about him.

Arg. 2.Secondly, Because without such power of resistence in the hands of subjects, all distinction and limitation of Government is vain: and all formes resolve into absolute and arbitrary; for that is so, which is unlimited; and that is unlimited, not onely which hath no limits set: but also which hath no sufficient Limits, for to be restrained from doing what I will, by a power which can restrain me no longer nor otherwise then I will, is all one, as if I were left at my own Will. I take this to be cleare: Now it is as cleare, that without this forceable resistence of Instruments of usurped power be lawfull, no sufficient limits can be to the Princes Will, and all Lawes bounding him are to no purpose. This appeares by enumerating the other meanes, Prayer to God: Petition to the Prince: Deniall of obedience: Deniall of Subsidie: a moderate use of the power of denying as Doctor Ferne calls it: These are all: but what are these to hinder, if a Prince be minded to overthrow all, and bring the whole Government to his own Will? For Prayer, and Petition, these are put in to fill up the number: They are no limitations, they may be used in the most absolute Monarchy; for deniall of obedience, that may keep me from being an Instrument of publique servitude; but Princes Wills never want them which will yeild obedience, if I deny it; Yea enough to destroy all the rest, if nothing be left them but to suffer: Then for deniall of Subsidie, if he may be thousands of Instruments take all, or what he, or they please, and I must not resist: what need he care whether the people deny or grant: If a Prince be taught, that he may do it: cases and reasons will soon be brought to perswade him; that in them he may lawfully doe it; as late experiences have given us too much Testimonie: Thus it is apparent, that the deniall of this Power of Resistence of Instruments overthrowes and makes invalid all Government, but that which is absolute: and reduces the whole world de jure to an absolute subjection, that is, servitude: for the end of all constitution of moderated forms is not that the supreme power might not lawfully exorbitate, but that it might have no power to exorbitate.

The Dr. is conscious hereof; and therefore tells us in his Sect. 5. This is the very reason which is made for the Popes power of curbing and deposing Kings in case of heresie: because else the Church, saies the Papist, hath no meanes for the maintenance of the Catholique Faith, and its own safety: But who sees not the vast difference ’twixt these two? and that the same reason may be concluding here, which is apparently non concluding there; For 1. They thereby would draw to the Pope an authoritative power: we no such superiour power: but only a power of resistence for self-conservation which nature and the Law of reason gives to every one; and may stand with the condition of subjection and inferiority. 2. They on this reason give the Pope a Power over the very person of the King; we only of resisting of unauthorized invading destroyers, comming under the colour of an authority which is not in the Soveraigne to be derived. 3. They prove a civill right for spirituall reasons, we onely for civill reasons. 4. The Church and the faith are constituted in their very formall being from Christ himselfe, who is the head and great Shepheard immediately in his owne person: and as it is his owne family; so he keeps the power of preserving it in his owne hands; having made direct and particular promises to assure us of their upholding against all subvertion, by his own power: so that here is assurance enough, without visible meanes of force for a spirituall body, which lives by faith. But in a civill State there is no such assurance, nor supporting promises: power onely in the undefined being of it, being Gods immediate Ordinance, and not in this specificated or determinate being: wherefore it hath no such immediate provision made for its preservation no promise of a divine power for its standing: but as it is left by God to mens wisdome to contrive the frame, so to their providence to establish meanes of preservation. As the body is outward and Civill, so the upholding meanes must be such; spirituall and infallibly assuring a Formed State hath not, as the Church and Faith have; if there be none of outward force and power neither, then none at all it hath, and is in all case indeed. But there is an art full of venome, when a truth can not bee beaten downe by just reasoning, then to make it odious by hatefull comparisons: so in this case aspersions are cast, as if the Patrons of Resistence did borrow the Popish and Jesuiticall grounds, and their Positions as dangerous to Kings, as the Jesuites hell-bred and bloudy Principles: whereas it appeares by all this discourse, and I am perswaded is written in Capitall Letters in the very Conscience of them which despitefully object it, that there is no congruity at all ’twixt their Doctrines, no more then ’twixt Light and Darknesse.

Arg. 3.Thirdly, because such power is due to a publike State for its preservation, as is due to a particular person: But every particular person may lawfully by force resist illegall destructive Ministers, though sent by the command of a legall Soveraigne, provided no other meanes of selfe-preservation be enough. This Assumption the Doctor seemes to grant; he denies it to be lawfull against the Person of the Prince, but in effect yeelds it against subordinate persons: But the main is against the Proposition, and the Doctor is so heavie a friend to the State that he thinkes it not fit to allow it that liberty he gives every private man. But whose Judgement will concurre with his herein, I cannot imagine; for sure the Reason is greater, the publike safety being far more precious, and able to satisfie the dammages of a publike resistence, then one particular mans is of a private. But of this more in answer to his Reasons.

Arg. 4.Fourthly, because it is a power put into the two Estates by the very reason of their Institution; and therefore they not onely may, but also ought to use it for publike safety: yea they should betray the very trust reposed in them by the Fundamentals of the Kingdome if they should not. An authority Legislative they have: Now to make Lawes and to preserve Lawes are acts of the same power; yea, if three powers jointly have interest in making of Lawes, surely either of these severally have, and ought to use that power in preserving them. Also that the authority which the Houses have is as well given them for preserving the government by established lawes as for establishment of lawes to govern by is a truth proved by the constant use of their power to that end, in correcting the exorbitance of inferiour Courts questioning delinquent Judges and Officers of State for violations, and much is done in this kinde by the sole authority of the Houses without the concurrence or expectance of Royall power: so then, supposing they have such an authority for safety of publike Government, to question and censure inferiour Officers for transgressions, though pretending the Kings authority, can it be denied but that their authority will beare them out to use forcible resistence against such, be they more or fewer.

Arg. 5.Fifthly, the Kings Warrant under his hand exempts not a Malefactor from the censure of a Court of Justice, nor punishment imposed by Law, but the Judge must proceed against him according to Law: for the Law is the Kings publike and authoritative Will; but a private Warrant to doe an unlawfull act, is his private and unauthoritative Will: wherefore the Judge ought to take no notice of such Warrant, but to deale with the Offendor as no other then a private man. This proves that such Instruments thus illegally warranted, are not authorized; and therefore their violence may be by force resisted, as the assaults of private men, by any; and then much rather by the Houses of Parliament: which, supposing them divided from the King to have no complete authority, yet sure they have two parts of the greatest Legislative authority. But I feare I shall seeme superfluous, in producing Arguments to prove so cleare a truth: Is it credible that any one will maintaine so abject an esteeme of their authority, that it will not extend to resistence of private men, who should endevour the subversion of the whole frame of Government, on no other Warrant then the Kings Will and Pleasure? Must they be meerly passive? Is patience, and the deniall of their Votes to a subversion, all the opposition they must use, if a King (which God forbid) should on his Royall pleasure send Cut-throats to destroy them as they fit in their Houses? Is all their authority (if the King desert them or worse) no more then to Petition, and suffer; and by a moderate use of their power of denying, dissent from being willing to be destroyed? If power of resisting by force of subverters armed by the Kings Will (for by his Authority they cannot) be unlawfull for them, all these absurdities must follow: yea, the vilest Instrument of Oppression, shewing but a Warrant from the King to beare him out, may range and rage all his dayes through a Kingdome, to waste and spoile, taxe and distraine, and at utmost of his insolence must have no more done to him by the Parliament it selfe, then to stay his hand, as the basest Servant may his Masters, or the meanest Subject the Kings owne hand; by the Doctors own confession. Consider then and admire, if any men of learning will deny this power of forcible resistence of Ministers, of subverting commands to be lawfull. I have thus far confirmed my assertion, not that I finde any openly opposing it, but because the Doctor and some other seeme to have a mind that way, and doe strike at it, though not professedly and in open dispute.

For the severall proofes brought in behalfe of Resistence, some of them prove as much as is here asserted; others are not to the purpose. Particularly, that of the Peoples rescuing Jonathan from his Fathers bloudy resolution proves lawfulnesse of hindering unreasonable self-destructive purposes, even in absolute Monarchies, if it prove any thing. That of Vzziah thrusting out by the Priests, is not to the purpose: but Davids raising and keeping Forces about him, and his purpose at Keilah, proves the point directly viz. Lawfulnesse of forcible resistance of Cut-throats even though Saul himselfe were in presence: This the Doctor sees plainly, and therefore &illegible; it off, by saying, His example is extraordinary; as if he were not a present Subject, because he was designed by Gods revealed counsell to be a future King. And he confesses Etisha’s example of shutting the doore against the Kings messenger proves personall defense against sudden illegall assaults of messengers, which is the thing in Question.

Sect 4.Let us now view the strength of what is said against resistence whether any thing comes home against this Assertion. The Doctors proofes from the old Testament: come not to the matter: Moses, and afterwards the Kings, were of Gods particular designation, setting them absolutely over the people, on no condition or limitation; so that did they prove any thing, yet they concerne not us, respecting a Government of another nature.The following marginalia text is unreadable and Liberty Fund has made no effort to partially transcribe it. But particularly, that of Corah and the Princes rebelling against Moses, is not to the matter; it was a resistence of Moses owne Person and Office; and doubtlesse penury of other proofes caused this and the rest here to be alledged: For that 1 Sam. 8 18. how inconsequent is it, to say, the people should cry unto the Lord, therefore they had no other meanes to helpe them but cries to God; though (I confesse) in that Monarchy they had not. That speech 1 Sam. 26 9. was most true there, and is as true here, but not to the purpose, being spoken of the Kings owne Person. But the maine authority brought against resistence is that Rom. 13. and on that Doctor Ferne builds his whole discourse: Let us therefore something more largely consider what is deduced out of that Text. First, he supposes the King to be the Supreme in Saint Peter, and the Higher power in Saint Paul. Secondly, hee collects All persons, every soule is forbidden to resist. Thirdly, that then was a standing Senate, which not long before had the supreme Power in the Romane State: It is confessed; but that they could challenge more at that time when Saint Paul writ then our great Councell will or can, I deny: For that State devolving into Monarchy by Conquest, they were brought under an Absolute Monarchy, the Senate it selfe swearing full subjection to the Prince; his Edicts and Acts of Will were Lawes, and the Senates consent onely pro forma, and at pleasure required. He who reads Tacitus cannot but see the Senate brought to a condition of basest servitude, and all Lawes and Lives depending on the will of the Prince: I wonder then the Doctor should make such a parallel. Indeed the Senate had been far more then ever our Parliaments were or ought to be: but now that was far lesse then our Parliament hath been, or (I hope) ever will be: They were become the sworne Vassals of an absolute Emperour, ours the sworne Subjects of a Liege or Legall Prince. Fourthly, he sayes, then was more cause of Resistence, when Kings were Enemies to Religion, and had overthrown Lawes and Liberties. I answere, There were no causes for Resistence: Not their enmity to Religion, had they but a legall power, because Religion then was no part of the Laws and so its violation no subversion of established government. And for the overthrow of Lawes and Liberties, that was past and done, and the government new, the Senate and all the rest actually sworne to absolute Principality: Now an Ordinance of absolute Monarchy was constituted, the sacred bond of an Oath had made it inviolate. But what would he inferre hence, all being granted him? Sure this he doth intend, That every soule among us, severall, and conjoyned in a Senate, must be subject for conscience, must not resist, under paine of Damnation: All this, and what ever besides he can justly infer out of that Text, we readily grant: But can any living man hence collect, that therefore no resistence may be made to fellow-subjects: executing destructive illegall acts of the Princes will in a legall Monarchy? Will he affirme that the Ordinance of God is resisted, and Damnation incurred thereby? Gods Ordinance is the Power, and the Person invested with that power; but here force is offered to neither as before I have made it appeare. And herein we have B. &illegible; consenting, where he sayes,&illegible; of &illegible; p. 94, & 280. that the superiour power here forbidden to be resisted, is not the Princes will against his Lawes but agreeing with his Lawes. I thinke the day it selfe is not more cleare then this satisfaction, to all that can bee concluded out of that Text: so the foundation of all that discourse is taken from it, if his intent were thence to prove unlawfulnesse of Resistence of Instruments of Arbitrarinesse in this Kingdome.

Let us also consider the force of his Reasons, whether they impugne this point in hand. He sayes, such power of resistence would be no fit meanes of safety to a State, but prove a remedy worse then the diseases. His Reasons, first, because it doth tend to the overthrow of that order, which is the life of a Common-wealth; it would open a way to People, upon the like pretences, to resist and even overthrow power duly administred. 2. It may proceed to a change of government. 3. It is accompanied with the evills of Civill-Warre. 4. On the same ground the two Houses proceed against the King, may the people proceed to resistence against them; accusing them not to discharge their trust. Lastly, seeing some must be trusted in every State. It is reason the highest and small trust, should be in the highest power. These are his main reasons on which he builds his conclusion against resistence.

To his first, I say it were strange if resistence of distructive disorder should tend to the overthrow of Order: It may for the time disturbe, as Physick while it is in working disturbes the naturall bodie, if the peccant humors make strong opposition: but sure it tends to health, and so doth this resistence of disorder to Order. Neither would it open a way for the people to violate the Powers; for doing right can open no way to the doing of wrong. If any wicked seditious spirits should make use of the Vail of Justice to cover unnaturall Rebellion: Shall a peoples right and liberty be taken from them to prevent such possible abuse? Rather let the foulnesse of such pretences discover it selfe, so God and good men will abhorre them: such Cloakes of Rebellion have in former ages been taken off, and the Authors brought to just confusion, without the expence of the liberties of this Kingdome.

To the second; must not Instruments be resisted, which actually intend, and seeked a chang of Government: because such resistence may proceed to a chang of Government? Is not an unlikely possibility of change to be hazarded, rather then a certaine one suffered? But I say, It cannot proceed to a chang of Government, unles it exceed the measure of lawfull resistence: yea it is impossible, that resistence of Instruments should ever proceed to a change of Government; for that includeth the greatest resistence and violation of the person and power of the Monarch, the lawfullnesse of which I utterly disclaime.

Thirdly, it is not ever accompanied with the evills of Civill Warre: But when the Princes Will findes enough Instruments of their Countreys ruine to raise it. And then the mischife of that war must light on those which raise it: But suppose it may ensue, yet a temporary evill of war is to be chosen rather then a perpetuall losse of liberty, and subversion of the established frame of a Government.

In the fourth, I deny the parity of reason: for the two Houses are bodies constituted and endowed with legislative authority, and trust of preservation of the frame, by the Fundamentalls of the Kingdome: which the people out of those Houses are not. Againe the Government being composed of a threefold consenting power, one to restraine the exorbitance of another: All three together are absolute and equivalent to the power of the most absolute Monarch: The concurrent Will of all three, makes a Law, and so it is the Kingdomes Law.

To the last, I answer, In every State some must be trusted, and the highest trust is in him who hath the Supreame power: These two the Supreame Trust, and the Supreame Power are inseperable: And such as the power is, such is the trust: An absolute power supposes an absolute trust: A Power allayed with the annexion of another power as here it is, supposeth a trust of the same nature. A joynt trust, yet saving the supremacie of the Monarch, so far forth as it may be saved, and not be absolute and the others authority nullified. It may be further argued:How farre forth the sword is in the hand of the Monarch? that it being the Prerogative Royall to have the managing of the sword, that is, legall force, in the Kingdome; none can, on any pretence whatever use lawfull force, either against him, or any, but by his Will: for it is committed to him by law, and to none but whom he assignes it to: so that the Lawes of the Kingdome putting all power of force and Armes into his trust, have placed him, and all those who serve him, in a state of irresistiblenes in respect of any lawfull force. This is a point much stood on and on this ground, the Parliament now assuming the disposing of the Militia by an Ordinance, it is complained on, as a usurping of what the Law hath committed to the King as his Prerogative; The opposing of which Ordinance by a Commission of Array, was the beginning of this miserable Civill-Warre. I will distinctly lay down my Answer hereto, submitting it to every impartiall judgement.

Pos. 1.1. The power of the Sword being for defence of the Lawes, by punishing violators, and protecting subjects, it is subservient to Government, and must needs belong to him who is entrusted with the Government, as a necessarie requisite without which he cannot performe his trust.

Pos. 2.2. As it is an appendix to the power of Government, and goes along with it, so it goes under the same termes: belonging to the Prince, as the other doth: sc. absolutely, to use at will, where the Monarchie is absolute; or with limitation, to use according to Law, where the Monarchy is limited: so that, in this Government the Armes and sword of the Kingdome is the Kings, to a defined use committed to him; viz. For defence of the Lawes and Frame of Government established, and not for arbitrary purposes, or to enable Ministers to execute commands of meer Will.

Pos. 3.3. The two Houses in virtue of the Legislative authority, in part residing in them, are interested in the preservation of Lawes and Government, as well as the King: And in case, the King should misimploy that power of Arms to strengthen subverting Instruments: Or in case the Lawes and government be in apparent danger, the King refusing to use the sword to that end of preservation for which it was committed to him: I say, in this case, the two Estates may by extraordinary and temporary Ordinance assume those Armes, wherewith the King is entrusted, and performe the Kings trust: And though such Ordinance of theirs is not formally legall, yet it is eminently legall, justified by the very intent of the Architects of the Government, when for these uses they committed the Armes to the King. And no doubt they may command the strength of the Kingdome to save the being of the Kingdome: for none can reasonably imagine the Architectonicall Powers, vvhen they committed the power of government and Armes to one to preserve the Frame they had composed, did thereby intend to disable any, much lesse the two Estates, from preserving it, in case the King should faile to doe it in this last need. And thus doing the Kings Worke, it ought to be interpreted as done by his Will: because as the Law is his Will, so that the Law should be preserved is his Will, which he expressed when he undertooke the government: Tis his deliberate Will, and ought to be done, though at any time he oppose by an after-Will, for that is his sudden Will, as Doctor Ferne himselfe Sect. 1. doth teach us to distinguish.


Chap. VI. In what cases the other Estates may, without or against the Kings Personall consent, assume the Armes of the Kingdome?Quest. 6.

Sect. 1.WHo ever were the Authors of that Booke lately published, stiled, Scripture and Reason pleaded for defensive Armes, have laid new and over-large grounds for resistence. Two Assertions they endevour to maintaine: First, those Governours (whether supreme or others) who under pretence of authority from Gods Ordinance, disturb the quiet and peaceable life in Godlinesse and Honesty, are farre from being Gods Ordinance in so doing,Whether it be lawfull to take up armes agonist the Magistrate, perverting his power to a wrong end? Sect. 3. Secondly, This Tyranny not being Gods Ordinance, they which resist it even with Armes, resist not the Ordinance of God. Hereon, Sect. 4. they free Christians, even in the Apostles time, and so under the Romane Emperours, or any other Government, from necessity of passive subjection in case of persecution; affirming that the Christians in those first Persecutions, had they been strong enough, might have used Armes for defence against the Tyranny of their Emperours. Their ground is from the Reasons used by the Apostle Rom. 13. where he commands subjection, & forbids resistence to the higher power, because they are Gods ordinance, his Ministers for praise to west-doers, for terrour to evill doers. But I must professe my self to dissent from them in this opinion, conceiving that the Apostle in urging those Reasons drawne from the due ends of Power, doth intend to presse them to subjection by shewing them what benefit comes to men by authority in its due use; and not to shew them how far they are bound to be subject, and in what cases they may resist: For had he such a meaning at that time, when the Governours did altogether crosse those ends of their Ordination, he had taught them rather a Doctrine of Resistence then Subjection: shall we conceive that hee would presse subjection to Powers in the hands of Heathens and Persecutors, if he had not intended they should passively be subject unto them, even under those Persecutions? Rather I approve the received Doctrine of the Saints in ancient and moderne times, who could never finde this licence in that place of the Apostle: and doe concurre with Master Burroughs,Answ. to Dr. Ferne Sect. 2. professing against resistence of authority, though abused: if those (saies he) who have power to make Lawes, make sinfull Lawes, and so give authority to any to force obedience we say here there must be either flying, or passive Obedience. And againe, We acknowledge we must not resist for Religion, if the Lawes of the land be against it. But what doe they say against this? In making such Lawes against Religion the Magistrates are not Gods ordinance; and therefore to resist is not to resist Gods ordinance: As an inferiour Magistrate, who hath a Commission of Power for such ends, is resistible if hee exceed his Commission, and abuse his Power for other ends; so Princes being Gods Ministers, and having a deputed Commission from him to such ends, viz. the promotion of godlinesse, Peace, Justice, if they pervert their power to contrary ends, may be resisted without violation of Gods ordinance. That I may give a satisfactory answere to this, which is the summe of their long discourse, I must lay it downe in severall Assertions.

Assert. 1.First, I acknowledge Gods ordinance is not onely Power, but Power for such ends, sc. the good of the People.

Assert. 2.Secondly, it is also Gods ordinance, that there should be in men, by publike consent called thereto, and invested therein, a power to choose the meanes, the Lawes, and Rules of government conducing to that end: and a power of Judging in relation to those Lawes, who be the well doers which ought to be praised, and who the evill doers who ought to be punished. This is as fully Gods ordinance as the former; for without this the other cannot be performed.

Assert. 3.Thirdly, when they who have this finall civill Judicature shall centure good men as evill doers; or establish iniquity by a Law, to the encouragement of evill doers; in this case, if it be a subordinate Magistrate doth it, appeale must bee made (as Saint Paul did) to the supreme; if it be the supreme, which through mistake or corruption doth mis-censure, from whom there lyes no Civill Appeale, then without resistence of that Judgement wee must passively submit: And he who in his owne knowledge of innocency or goodnesse of his cause shall by force resist that man erects a Tribunal in his owne heart against the Magistrates Tribunal; cleares himselfe by a private Judgement against a publike, and executes his owne sentence by force against the Magistrates sentence, which hee hath repealed and made void in his owne heart. In unjust Censures by the highest Magistrate, from whom there is no Appeale but to God, the sentence cannot be opposed till God reverse it to whom we have appealed: In the meane time vvee must suffer, as Christ did, notwithstanding his Appeale, 1 Pet. 2. 23. and so must wee notwithstanding our Appeale, 1 Pet. 4. 19. for he did so for our example. If an Appeale to God, or a censure in the Judgement of the condemned might give him power of resistence, none would be guilty, or submit to the Magistrates censure any further then they please. I desire those Authors, before they settle their judgement in such grounds (which I feare will bring too much scandall) to weigh these particulars. First, their opinion takes away from the Magistrate the chiefe part of Gods ordinance, sc. povver of definitive judgement of Lawes and Persons, who are the good, and who the bad, to be held so in Civill proceedings. Secondly, they justifie the Conscience of Papists, Heretickes, and grossest Malefactors to resist the Magistrate, in case they be perswaded their cause is good. Thirdly, they draw men off from the commands of Patience under persecution, and conforming to Christ and his Apostles, in their patient enduring without verball or reall opposition, though Christ could not have wanted power to have done it, as he tells Peter. Fourthly, they deprive the Primitive and Moderne Martyrs of the glory of suffering, imputing it either to their ignorance or disability. Fifthly, it is a wonder, that sith in Christs and his Apostles time there was so much use of this power of resistence, they would by no expresse word shew the Christians this liberty, but condemne resistence so severely. Sixthly, there is in the case of the Parliament now taking up Armes no need of these offensive grounds; Religion being now a part of our Nationall Law, and cannot suffer but the Law must suffer with it.

Sect. 2.Now to the proposed Question I answere first Negatively, sc. 1. It ought not to be done against all illegall proceedings, but such which are subversive and unsufferable. Secondly, not publike resistence, but in excesses inducing publike evils: for to repell private injuries of highest nature with publike hazzard and disturbance, will not quit cost, unlesse in a private cafe the common Liberty be strooke at.1. When arms &illegible; not to be &illegible; Thirdly, not when the government is actually subverted, and a new forme (though never so injuriously) set up, and the People already engaged in an Oath of absolute subjection: for the remedy comes too late and the establishment of the new makes the former irrevocable by any justifiable power, within the compasse of that Oath of God: This was the case of the Senate of Rome in Saint Pauls time.2. When they may be &illegible; Secondly, affirmatively: I conceive three cases when the other Estates may lawfully assume the force of the Kingdome, the King not joyning, or dissenting, though the same be by Law committed to him. First, when there is invasion actually made, or imminently feared by a forraigne Power. Secondly, when by an intestine Faction the Lawes and Frame of government are secretly undermined, or openly assaulted: In both these cases the Being of the Government being endangered, their trust binds, as to assist the King in securing, so to secure it by themselves, the King refusing. In extreme necessities the liberty of Voices cannot take place, neither ought a Negative Voice to hinder in this exigence, there being no freedome of deliberation and choice, when the Question is about the last end: Their assuming the sword in these cases is for the King, whose Being (as King) depends on the Being of the Kingdome; and being interpretatively his act, is no disparagement of his Prerogative. Thirdly, in case the Fundamentall Rights of either of the three Estates bee invaded by one or both the rest, the wronged may lawfully assume force for its owne defence; because else it were not free, but dependent on the pleasure of the other. Also the suppression of either of them, or the diminishing of their Fundamentall Rights, carries with it the dissolution of the Government: And therefore those grounds which justifie force to preserve its Being, allowes this case, which is a direct innovation of its Being and Frame.


Chap. VII. Where the Legall Power of Finall iudging in these cases doth resiae, in case the three Estates differ about the same?Quest. 7.

Sect. 1.IN this Question (for our more distinct proceeding) some things are necessarily to be observed. First, that we meddle not here with the &illegible; of Questions of inferiour nature; viz. such as are ’twixt subject and subject, or the King and a subject, in matter of particular right,The Question stated. which may be decided other way, without detriment of the publike Frame, or diminution of the priviledges of either of the three Estates. Secondly difference is to be made even in the Questions of utmost danger: First, for it may be alledged to be either from without, by invasion of forrain Enemies; or by a confederacy of intestine subverters, in which neither of the three Estates are alledged to be interessed, and so the case may be judged without relation to either of them, or detriment to their priviledges. Here I conceive a greater latitude of power may be given to some to judge without the other; for it inferres not a subordinating of any of the three to the other. Secondly, or else it may be alledged by one or two of the Estates against the other, that not contenting it selfe with the Powers allowed to it by the Lawes of the Government, it seekes to swallow up, or entrench on the priviledges of the other, either by immediate endevours, or else by protecting and interesting it selfe in the subversive plots of other men. Thirdly, in this case wee must also distinguish betwixt, first, authority of raising Forces for defense against such subversion, being knowne and evident: secondly and authority of judging and finall determining, that the accused Estate is guilty of such designe and endevour of subversion, when it is denied and protested against. This last is the particular in this Question to be considered; not whether the People are bound to obey the authority of two, or one of the Legislative Estates in resisting the subversive assaies of the other, being apparent and self-evident; which I take in this Treatise to be cleare. But when such plea of subversion is more obscure and questionable, which of the three Estates hath the power of ultime and supreme judicature by Vote or sentence to determine it against the other; so that the People are bound to rest in that determination, and accordingly to give their assistance, eo nomine, because it is by such Power so noted and declared?

Determination of the Question.For my part in so great a cause if my earnest desire of publique good, and peace, may justifie me to deliver my minde, I will prescribe to the uery Question: for it includes a solecisme in government of a mixt temperature: To demand which Estate may challenge this power of finall determination of Fundamentall controversies arising betwixt them, is to demand which of them shall be absolute: For I conceive that in the first part hereof, I have made it good, that this finall utmost controversie arising betwixt the three Legislative Estates, can have no legall. constituted Judge in a mixed government: for in such difference, he who affirmes that the people are bound to follow the Judgement of the King against that of the Parliament, destroyes the mixture into absolutenesse: And he who affirmes that they are bound to cleave to the Judgement of the two Houses against that of the King resolves the Monarchie into an Aristocracie, or Democracie, according as he places this finall Judgement. Whereas I take it to be an evident truth, that in a mixed government no power is to be attributed to either Estate, which directly, or by necessary consequence, destroyes the liberty of the other.

Sect. 2.Yet it is strange to see, how in this Epidemicall division of the Kingdome, the Abectors of both parts claime this unconcessible Judgement. But let us leave both sides, pleading for that which we can grant neither, and weigh the strength of their Arguments.

Dissolution of Arguments placing it in the King.First, Dr. Ferne layes downe two reasons, why this finall Judgement should belong to the King. 1. Monarchie, saies he, Sect. 5. settles the chiefe power and finall Judgement in one. This Position of his can be absolutely true no where but in absolute Monarchies: and in effect, his book knowes no other then absolute government. 2. Seeing some one must be trusted in every State, It is reason, saies he, Sect. 5. the highest and finall trust, should be in the higher and Supreame power. I presume by finall trust, he meanes the trust of determining these Supreame and finall disagreements; and accordingly I answer; It is not necessary that any one be trusted with a binding power of Judicature in these cases; for by the foundations of this government, none is, yea, none can be trusted with it: for to intend a mixed government, and yet to settle the last resolution of all judgement in one, is to contradict their very intention. Neither in a constituted government must we dispose of powers according to the guesse of our reason; for mens apprehensions are various; The Dr. thinkes this power fittest for the King: His answerers judge it fittest for the two Houses, and give their reasons for it too. Powers must there reside, where they are de facto by the Architects of a government placed: he who can bring a fundamentall Act stating this power in any, saies something to the matter: but to give our conjectures, where it should be, it but to provide fuell for contention.

Dissolution of the Arguments placing it in the two Houses.On the contrary, The Author of that which is called A Fuller Answer to that Dr. hath two maine Assertions placing this Judgement in the two Houses.

1. The finall and casting result of this States Judgement concerning what these Lawes, dangers, and meanes of prevention are, resides in the two Houses of Parliament, saies he, p. 10.

2. In this finall resolution of the States Judgement, the people are to rest, ibidem, pag. 14. Good Lord! What extream opposition is between these two sorts of men? If the maintenance of these extremes be the ground of this warre, then our Kingdome is miserable, and our Government lost which side soever overcome: for I have, more then once, made it good, that these Assertions are destructive on both sides: But I am rather perswaded, that these Officious Propugners overdoe their worke, and give more to them whose cause they plead, then they ever intended to assume: Nay, rather give to every one their due: give no power to one of these three to crush and undoe the other at pleasure: But why doth this Answer give all that to the two Houses which ere while they would not suffer when the Judges in the case of Ship-money had given it to the King? sure, when they denied it to him they did not intend it to themselves. 1. Hee tells us In them resides the reason of the State: And that the same reason and Judgement of the State which first gave this government its being, and constitution; therefore all the people are to be led by it and submit to it as their publique reason and Judgement.

I answer, if by state, he meane the whole Kingdome: I say, the reason of the two Houses divided from the King, is not the reason of the Kingdome, for it is not the Kings reason, who is the head and chiefe in the Kingdome. If by state be meant the people, then it must be granted, that as farre forth as they represent them, their reason is to be accounted the reason of the Kingdome: and doth binde so farre forth as the publique reason of the Kingdome can binde after they have restrained their reason and will to a condition of subjection: so that put case it be the reason of the state, yet not the same which first gave this Government its being: for then it was the reason of a State, yet free and to use their reason and Judgement in ordaining a Government: but now the reason of a State bound by Oath to a Government, and not at liberty to resolve againe: Or to assume a supreme power of judging, distructive to the frame of Government they have established, and restrained themselves unto. Their reason is ours, so farre as they are an ordained representative body: But I have before demonstrated, that in this frame, the Houses could not be ordained a legall Tribunall to passe Judgement in this last case: for then the Architects by giving them that Judicature, had subordinated the King to them, and so had constituted no Monarchie. 2. He argues, the Parliament being the Court of supreme Judicature and the Kings great and highest Councell, therefore that is not to be denied to it, which inferiour Courts ordinarily have power to do, viz. To judge matters of right betweene the King and Subject: Yea, in the highest case of all: The Kings power to tax the subject in case of danger, and his being sole Judge of that danger, was brought to cognizance, and passed by the Judges in the Exchequor. I answer, 1. There is not the same reason betwixt the Parliament & other courts. In these the King is Judge, the Judges being deputed by him, and judging by his authority; so that if any of his Rights be tried before them, it is his owne Judgement, and he judges himselfe; and therefore it is fit he should be bound by his owne sentence: But in Parliament the King and People are Judges, and that not by an authority derived from him, but originally invested in themselves. So that when the two Estates judge without him in any case not prejudged by him, it cannot be called his Judgement, (as that of the other Courts, being done by his authority) and if he be bound by any Judgment of the two Estates without him, he is bound by an externall power which is not his owne; that is, he is subordinated to another power in the State where he is supreme; which is contradictory. Secondly, in other Courts, if any case of right be judged ’twixt him and the subject, they are cases of particular Rights which diminish not Royalty if determined against him. Or if they passe cases of generall right, (as they did in that of Ship-money) it is but declaratively to shew what is by Law due to one and the other: yet their Judgement is revocable, and liable to a repeale by a superiour Court, as that was by Parliament. But if the Kings Prerogatives should be subjected to the Judgement of the two Estates, the King dissenting, then he should be subject to a sentence in the highest Court, and so irremediable; a Judicatory should be set up to determine of his highest Rights without him, from which he could have no remedy. Thus maine causes may bee alledged, why, though other Courts doe judge his Rights, yet the two Estates in Parliament (without him) cannot: and it is from no defect in their power, but rather from the eminency of it, that they cannot. If one deputed by common consent of three, doth by the power they have given them determine controversies betweene those three, it is not for either of them to challenge right to judge those cases, because one who is inferiour to them doth it. Indeed if the power of the two Houses were a deputed power, as the power of other Courts is, this Argument were of good strength: but they being concurrents in a supreme Court by a power originaliy their owne, I conceive it hard to put the power of finall Judgement in all controversies ’twixt Him and them exclusively, or solely into their hands.

Sect. 3.If it be demanded then, how this cause can be decided? and which way must the People turne in such a contention? I answere, If the non-decision be tolerable, it must remaine undecided, whiles the Principle of legall decision is thus divided, and by that division each suspends the others power. If it be such as is destructive, and necessitates a determination,&illegible; to be done in such a Contention? this must be made evident; and then every Person must aide that Part, which in his best Reason and Judgement stands for publike good, against the destructive. And the Lawes and Government which he stands for, and is sworne to justifies and beares him out in it, yea; bindes him to it. If any wonder I should justifie a power in the two Houses to resist, and command aide against any Agents of destructive commands of the King, and yet not allow them power of judging when those Agents or commands are destructive. I answere, I doe not simply deny them power of judging and declaring this; but I deny them to be a legall Court ordained to judge of this case authoritatively, so as to bind all People to receive and rest in their judgement for conscience of its authority, and because they have Voted it: ’Tis the evidence, not the power of their Votes, must bind our Reason and Practice in this case: We ought to conceive their Votes the Discoveries made by the best eyes of the Kingdome and which in likelihood should see most: But when they Vote a thing against the proceedings of the Third and supreme Estate, our Consciences must have evidence of Truth to guide them, and not the sole authority of Votes; and that for the Reason so oft alledged.


Chap. VIII. The contention now in being is debated, and the readiest meanes of Reconcilement proposed.

Sect. 1.THus have I (for my owne satisfaction, and the Conscience of every moderate and impartiall man who will peruse the same) set downe what I verily conceive to be the truth concerning those high matters, first of Monarchy in generall, and then of this of England, and have given my determination concerning all the weighty Questions which arise considerable in the course of handling both: Now nothing remaines, but to resolve the Conscience by this precedent light what to judge of the unhappy contention, which now is broken out into open warre, betweene the King and the two Houses. But this depending on matter of fact, is more fitly referred to every mans owne memory and Judgement; and nothing is to be done, but to acquaint himselfe with the certaine truth of those matters of fact, and then to judge therof according to the former Rules. To this issue the whole controversie is brought, That the two Houses may lawfully resist by force of Armes, all counsells and attempts of what men soever, tending to the subversion of the established Frame of Government, or themselves and their Fundamentall Priviledges; which is equivalent to the other; yea, though they are warranted by the commands and personall presence of the King himselfe: And that clearly, this is no resistence of the higher power in our Government (so no force be intended or used against the Kings owne Person) nor doth it come within the censure of Saint Paul Rom. 13. nor any other Scripture, nor right Reason grounded thereon: so that the Conscience assured hereof, hath nothing else to doe but to enquire whether the truth of Factlyes either in the Affirmative of the two Houses; That the Kingdome was in imminent danger, the King refusing to joyne with them for prevention of it, when they assumed the Militia for defence: Or else in the Kings Negative. Much hath beene said on both sides, to draw the Consciences of men to adherence; and many (no doubt) have judged according to their pre ingaged affections: Many Papers have I seene running out on both sides to unjustifiable extremes, and have much &illegible; on the contention, by making the breach wider: yea, I have read more said for them then (I am perswaded, notwithstanding the heat of the contention) either will say for themselves,Sect. 2. or can without the subversion of the other.

A debate upon the contention.Now for a man to resolve his Conscience about the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of this Warre, the course is not to cry it downe indefinitely, as a Resistence of Gods ordinance, nor of the higher Power: Nor to justifie it, because the cause stood for is Religion, and expurgation of in-crept corruptions in Church and State: For all standing for Religion and Reformation is not a justifiable cause to take up Armes; we having proved it before, that in this Kingdome nothing can warrant it, but apparent danger from destructive Counsellours and Instruments. Neither is it enough to demand, as Doctor Ferne doth Sect 6. Who were first in Armes? for the other part will by their Almanack finde Armes and Forces gathered and employed before those in Hull:Declar. of the Lords and Commons of Apr. 3. 1642. but that is not the resolving enquiry; it may fall out the defensive part may be first in Armes, to prevent the ruine of counsells and Plots which are apparently contrived, but not executed. The resolving enquiry (I thinke) must be, Whether at the Parliaments taking up of Armes, the Common-wealth, Frame of established Government, or (which is all one) the Being and radicali Powers of Parliament were in apparent danger of subversion? For if so, then the Armes and Force used against the Counsellours or Agents thereof is proved lawfull by all the precedent discourse.

His Majesties &illegible;. to the &illegible;. of the &illegible; Much 26. 1642.Now it will be alledged, and is in part acknowledged, that there was a grand intention and plot of altering the Government of this Kingdome and reducing it to an arbitrary way. They will not say his Majestie was conscious of it; but it was aimed at by many about him, and in power with him, whom it concerned to have him absolute: By these men he was told that such things were Law: which if they had bin so, then he had bin absolute by law. They will instance in the long and purposed diluse of Parliaments: The arbitrary Taxes and Impositions on most of the Commodities of the Kingdome: The encroachment of the Arbitrary Courts upon the Legall: The imposition of Ship-money: And the Judges opinion that the King had power to tax the subject in times of danger, and that he is the sole Judge of that danger: The raising an Army, and forcing the subject to furnish the same with Coat and Conduct-money. The intention of bringing up the Army, to subvert, or at best, to awe and confine the Parliament to bounds of proceeding of their owne setting. All this before or upon the beginning of the Parliament. Then the evidences and proofes against the Earle of Sirafford, This Majesties comming with the terror of such an attendance into the House of Commons to demand such a number of Members. Here is a succession of designes, all before the least show of resistence: for his Majesties comming to the House was Iannuary 4. 1641. And the first Petition to his Majestie about the Militia was not till the 26. of the same: And their resolution to settle it by themselves, His Majesties refusing was not till March 1. And among all these there is not one but tends to destroy the frame of Government. Not that every one who had a hand in them did aime at such a destruction; but looking on the designe it selfe (and we must judge of mens intentions by the nature of their Counsells and enterprizes,) every one of them strikes at the foundation of this legall frame, and tends to the introduction of Absolutenesse and Arbitrarinesse in the Soveraigne.

I acknowledge, that since that time, there is a Plea on both sides of danger of subversion: The King withdrew from London: and oft affirmes that He was driven therce, and could no longer remaine in safety: And the two Houses on the former designes plead a danger of subversion from evill Counsellours. Both sides now complaine of danger, and have taken up Armes to repell that danger: but these complaints of danger and taking up of Armes by both sides, was all since the succession of those fore recited plots. I know what hath been intended or done since the taking of Armes may be all affirmed to be for defense against danger; the withdrawment of so many Members of both Houses, the acts of hostility on both sides, the taxing, spoyling, and undoing of thousands of innocent people all must be excused by necessity of Warre, and self-defense. But what can be said for all those Plots and Essaies, which were the Parliaments first grounds of Feares and Forces? Were they removed before they tooke up Armes, and so their assuming them made causlesse and inexcusable? You will say, Those were the Plots of men in grace and authority about His Majesty, and that the illegality of those proceedings being made knowne to him. He disclaimes them professing solemnly he hath no intent but to governe by Law; and acknowledges that the Law is the measure of his power. But they doe tell you, That they object nothing against his Majesty, they impute nothing to Him, nor use force against Him but those destructive Counsellours, and their Abbettors which are about Him; because their danger is not from His intentions, but from theirs. It is answered, that His Majesty offers to secure them the Lawes, Liberties, and Religion, by any Acts they shall devise to that purpose.Parlian. Remonstrance May 19. 1642 They will tell you, Their danger is not from want of Laws to secure them for they are secured by Law already; their danger is from Men, and their Plots and Designes to overthrow Law; and a danger of subversion of Law cannot bee secured by Law; succeeding Lawes can be no better nor stronger then former Lawes: so that where those men and their counsels are in power, whose aime hath been the subversion of Parliaments, Liberties, and Lawes; and those Doctrines remaine affirmed and maintained by the Clergie of that side, which subvert all limitations of Monarchy, make all Lawes Acts of grace, and revocable Immunities granted to Subjects; condemning for Rebellion all force used even by the Parliament it selfe, against the meanest Instruments of violence employed by the Princes Will; making the Princes Will and Gods Ordinance one and the same thing, of the same latitude; so that resistence of one is resistence of the other: such Counsellours and such Doctrines are (they say) the ground of publike danger, from which no Lawes but Justice can secure us. Publike Liberty and Power of forcible resistence of Instruments of servitude are so conjoyned, that if you make it unlawfull simply to use such power of resistence, you make it unlawfull for a People to be free.

Sect. 3.What course then can be sufficient to answere their Demands of safety, if Lawes cannot doe it? Though I incurre the censure of high Presumption yet I will be so bold to afford my opinion herein, submitting it to the censure of every Judicious Reader;Meanes of reconcilement proposed. wishing it were worthy to be scanned by those, in whose hands it is to heale our divisions. What honest heart doth not bleed to see the ruine of this late flourishing Kingdome goe on so fast? Who can doe other then speake his minde, who conceives hee thinkes of any thing which may conduce to Peace and the re-uniting of this divided Body? Suffer mee therefore to disclose my heart in a case, in which every good man hath a deep interest. Thus then I could heartily desire.

Petit. 1.First, that the Parliament would desire and seeke in this unusuall way of Force no more then what makes necessarily for their, and the publike security: for none can justifie force in them any further then for security of their Priviledges, Lawes, and frame of Government.

Petit. 2.Secondly, that His Majesty would be pleased (according to his gracious Resolution, viz. To deny onely those things, the granting whereof would alter the Fundamentall Lawes, and endanger the foundation on which publike happinesse is built:) to condescend to all Acts of safety, both by establishing of Lawes tending to it;Answ. to the Petitions of Commons lan. 28. 1641. and removall of Persons of destructive counsells and Judgements because the danger alledged is from such.

Petit. 3.Thirdly, that because their maine feare hath been, that while his Majesty is swayed by such Persons, whose Judgement and endevours have been for Absolutenesse, the Militia of the Kingdome may be by them (making use of his Majesties Authority) employed in bringing to passe their long fomented and not yet deserted designe; His Majesty would be pleased (for this present) to authorize such over the Militia whom the Houses shall approve of, not thereby disparaging his power over the Militia, which by Law is invested in him; but satisfying by a condescent of grace their Feares from apprehensions of present danger.

Petit. 4.Fourthly, that the two Houses (in their wisedom) would put a difference between those Persons who were the ancient Dilinquents, Contrivers and principall Agents in the former designes of Arbitrarinesse; and those Members of both Houses; who since the Kings with-drawment and their assuming the Militia, have gone from the Houses to serve and adhere to his Majesty: For since the time that both parts have declared themselves to be in danger, many good subjects and Patriots have followed the parts, from conscience and perswasion of the truth of Allegations on either side, as their care and opinion of either Part hath lead them; (not that I can acquit them, who on any mis-leading assist the destructive party, from guilt, as Accessaries and Instruments of so unnaturall a designe) but that I cannot see how the authority and freedome of either of the three Estates can choose but undergoe a shew of disparagement, if its adherents and propugners (when it cries out of danger of subversion from the other, and calls and requires their assistance) should be proceeded against and punished as Delinquents, when they professe their aime hath beene no more then to preserve the just rights of any of the fundamentall Estates of the Kingdom, without impairment of the other.

Petit. 5.Fifthly that if possible, all those might be re-admitted into their severall Houses which are not guilty of the former designes for Absolutenesse, and have nothing alledged against them but their adherence to the King in this division, and might fit and act securely there, according to the due freedome of their Houses.

Petit. 6.Sixthly, that his Majesty (for the sake of Peace, and present necessity of composing this distemperature) would be pleased to put himselfe upon the Judgment and Affection of the two Estates so assembled in their full Bodies and suspend the use of his Negative voice, resolving to give his royall assent to what shall passe by the major part of both Houses freely voting concerning all matters of grievance and difference now depending in the two Houses. I am confident, if ever this War be transacted without the ruine of one side, which will endanger, if not undoe the whole, it must be by some such way of remission of rigour on both sides as I have now described: Which the God of Peace, in whose hands are the hearts and counsels of men, speedily and graciously effect for his Name sake.

FINIS.


Endnotes

 [a ] Decsar front Newmarket Mart. 9. 1641.

 


8.17. Anon., The Subject of Supremacie (14 June, 1643)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., The Subject of Supremacie. The Right of Caesar. Resolution of Conscience. Wherein are three Questions handled: Viz.
1. Whether the King without the Parliament may take up Armes, and in the time of it fight with friends or Foes, as having the Law of Armes in his owne Power, and no Law else?
2. Whether the Parliament without the King may take up Armes to defend themselves, and Kingdome, against Delinquents, Invaders, and Forces raised in, or out of the Kingdome?
3. Whether the People by Command of either to assist the one, and resist the other be Rebells?
And may serve as a Replication to the Reply of Dr. Ferne, concerning free Subjects; a Faithfull Councell, a Royall King, and Loyall People; placed by this Auhtor as slaves, a Faction, a Tyrnat, Rebells, in his Ignorance of Jurisdiction, Legall, and naturall Preservation.

Psal. 120. 7. My soule it hath much dwelt with him that hateth Peace; I am for Peace, and when I speake, they are for Warre.
London, Printed for Ben. Allen, and are to be sold at his Shop on Popes-head Alley, 1643.

Estimated date of publication

14 June, 1643.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 267; Thomason E. 106. (1.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Subject of SUPREMACIE.

The Argument With the Doctors Answerers, and his Anger.

THE fedler Answer, as the Author sayes, cost not many houres, and the Dr. saies the discourse was ready to another purpose of the Parliaments Power: now the Dr. disclaimes that, and sayes he meant no such matter as to deny the Militia to the Parliament, but whether the People might take up Armes against the King to resist his Commission of array? The Question will never bee stated right, or the Drs. Reason kept from Rebellion on the one side. He alwayes had, and still hath affection enough to Parliaments; I dare say none to this by his Rules of Conscience, for both in the science of the King, and conscience of the Fact, he reades the Law amisse; for Conscience is either the Lecture of the Law to the heart, or reades it to the same out of the just sentence it gives, so that I cannot tell whether Conscience reads the Law, or hath is read unto it. However, it is certaine the Law must be in it, even the Law of the &illegible; and not in the will of the King, but the Lawgiver; and that in England is the Parliament. In Israel God gave it for some Nations, and conscience had good warrant from Gods word, to fight when and where hee commanded him: but in Warre permitted upon Rules of reason without Revelation: the King might never fight without the Advice of his great Councell, and when Cæsar did it without the consent of the Senate, they recalled him, and were resolved for satisfaction to the Enemie, he should be delivered into their hands; and we know how justly upon this Rule, our Parliaments have pleaded their right, but now they have none, and if the people by their Command take up Armes, they are Rebells, yet not the Parliament, when the Law is, plus peccat Author, quam Actor. God help the Parliaments Armies commanded by them, they are all Traitors, and yet no Treason in them that command it. We must set downe three Questions more clearely than the Doctor hath done.

  • 1Whether the King without the Parliament may take up Armes, and in the time of it fight with friends or Foes, as having the Law of Armes in his owne Power, and no Law else?
  • 2Whether the Parliament without the King may take up Armes to defend themselves, and Kingdome, against Delinquents, Invaders, and Forces raised in or out of the Kingdome?
  • 3Whether the People by Command of either to assist the one, and resist the other be Rebelis? these are plaine Questions, and will keep the Dr. from shifting, and conscience to the Law.

I shall briefly answer them. The first, the Legislative Power being in the Parliament for all Lawes, the King can have no Power to fight without the advise of his Parliament except he may fight without a Law, and the King in alledging the Commission of Array, proves he must doe it by Law: and the Dr. saies he may without it, and so doe all that pen his papers, make the Militia inherent in his Person and himselfe the sole Judge. For the second I answer it affirmatively, and my reason is this. The people petition the Parliament, the Parliament the King, and his Answer is, he will be sole Judge of the time when, the cause why, and the manner how. This is a flat denyall of their power, and an assuming to himselfe an Arbitrary power to doe what he last, and that without necessitie: yet necessitie there is of the Militia to preserve the Kingdome, and the two Houses are Judges, and may command, the Militia for that necessary end. To the third I answer distinctly, that all that follow the King in his Warres without law, are Rebells and Traitors; and it is confessed by all the legislative power in the Parliament, and that the will, of the King against it is no Law. For the second part the people that assist the Parliament for the preservation of the Kingdome are good Subjects, and all that fight against the Kings Armies are neither Traitors, nor Rebells. If the King should set out a thousand Declarations, and send forth as many Proclamations, they are no more then the Popes excommunications against the Turkes, which the great Turke returned him, praying him he would call in his Epigrams, and to satisfie the King, I dare say by all the Books of Law, for law is the best reason, and what I have seene in the best, makes me say of all, that jurisdiction is either ordinary, or extraordinary, Bract. Rex est fous justifie, &c. but how? habet ordinariam jurisdictionem, &c. not to make or expound lawes, but see they be made and expounded in all Courts. From which words I firmely conclude, first, that from the King by his sworne Judges to his people, he as an head is to performe all ordinary jurisdiction; but secondly this flowes from an higher Fountaine, as lawes doe from God, and that’s the Parliament or legislative power, and so from it by the King Justice comes to people, and the Parliament is the head of all Jurisdiction: now if the King when he hath need to flye to that, flyes from it, it must execute Justice, or the people perish; and so I have said enough to satisfie all consciences, if I should not adde one word more: yet for the Arguments sake, and being requested to doe it, so many Malignants admiring the Drs. Booke, I have put pen unto paper, and expedited the worke in foure dayes, not to glory in the worke so suddenly done, but in humility to beg pardon if any thing amisse hath passed my pen, my heart went along with my hand, and my head in weakenesse may have done worse than I wished, but willingly I have done it, that Cæsar may have his due, in the Supremacy of ordinary Iurisdiction, and that no private man may presume to administer Justice without his VVarrant; but as for the Parliament, I must place in it an higher Jurisdiction to direct the King, which I may call an extraordinary jurisdiction, and the Writ expresseth it in these words, Mandamus quod consideratis dictorum negotiarum ardultate, & periculis imminentibus, cessante excusatione quacunque, dictis die & loco personaliter intersitis nobiscum. The first word sheweth the Kings ordinary jurisdiction in the Administration of Justice, He commands the Court to meet, propounds the difficulties and dangers, that no other Court can determine, and ties them to &illegible; and place, but being met the busines goes by consent, and no man is excused to be absent without licence, and the liberty some have taken is as much as in them lieth, the prodition of their Country, and perdition of the people, you shall see a Doctor determine desperately against all I have said, if I have not said enough or too much blame me not, for I blush at his impudence and Ignorance in the Cause.

Notes to move the Confident to consider.

The Parable of the VVidow, 2 Sam. 14. and her two Sonnes may set forth a distressed Kingdome with the Cause, but who is wise enough to make our &illegible; know it. Her Sonnes are in the Field, and fill it with bloud, and the Kings Throne is guiltlesse, and who may say he is faultie? The whole Family is risen and sayes deliver the Delinquents, and David promiseth no wrong shall be done to a VVidow; if at home she will be quiet: but that will not serve, she seeks Remedy before she depart, and laies all the wrong upon herselfe, and cleares the Kings Throne, which he promiseth shall preserve her. This makes her Petition the more strongly, and in the name of God, that the Revengers of bloud destroy no more. The King sweares they shall not. Then the woman followes it home, and layes the fault upon the King, that the banished are not brought back, and she goes againe to God with mans misery, and his mercy using meanes that his owne be not expelled from him, when he punisheth the wicked in the common Calamitie. Death is necessary to all, and as water &illegible; we are hopelesse in the grave, and therefore she speeds her request for present dispatch before all be lost. Now would the word of my Lord be comfortable, now as an Angell be might help me, and consider the good and the bad. She hath moved the King to aske her a Question, and the motion mindes him some courtier is in it, and he suspect loah, and she confesseth it; and who put the words into her mouth, to setch about such a forme of Speech? and she commends it to the King the second time, as an Angell for wisedome to know what was done, and it falls out happily for loah, and he thankes the King for it, and consesseth it as a favour, and speedily brings Absalom to Ierusalem, but he must be confined to his owne house, and in two yeares he sees not the Kings face, and cannot endure it, but sends for Ioah, who would not come at him, and hee setcheth him with a witnesse, setting fire on his corne, and at length he obtaines his Fathers kiffe, and by curtesies wins the hearts of the people from his Father, and by Ambition and Treachery revengeth himselfe for his hard use, and God knowes what will become of the contraversie, and when Conscience will be satisfied, which is the Title of the Drs. Book, and hee begins with a dangerous and perverse way, and gives it a check by the cleare light of Law Divine, and Humane, but hee meets with an implicite Faith, contrary to Conscience, which the blinder it is, the stronger it proves to be prevailed withall, and the more prevalent it is, that five Answerers for one Treatise trouble the Truth, which he is confident is on his side. Two trouble him more then the rest, Mr. Bridges, and the Fuller Answer. The one appeares with Licence and pleaseth the vulgar, the other with Learning and takes with the more intelligent Party: But the depth in this is as stained waters, not transparent for darknesse and colour. He feares not a full Margent against him of Greek and Latine, he dare trust his Readers with it, so they will be ware of the Text against Tyrants, which he means to defend, and requires a direct and positive Warrant for resistance. Tyrants are of two sorts with Tittle, and without it. With Tittle from God, and so he defen is all Tyrants for he cares not for compact a Conquest is Title enough. The people have no power to choose their Kings, their power is from God, and by Kings God derives all power to men, and without it they are all private, and want jurisdiction; that God meant to make Governments by Kings, and approved of none made without them, is the Drs. desperate Doctrine, teaching Kings Tyranny to doe what they list, and God to be the Author of it. All the Power that is of God is for good, and Pilate when hee said to our Saviour thou couldst have no Power but of God, hee meanes it not of civill power, as if God allowed Pilate to doe what hee list, but of power in generall; and the reason why hee resisted not, was that his Kingdome was not of that kinde, Iohn 18 36. if it had his Servants might have done it. But you will say that belongs to a King. True legally, not tyrannically; but if he tyrannize who may tame him? you have two Answers, the jurisdiction of the Kingdome, and thats legall: the naturall preservation of it, which being done orderly without tumult to defend a mans selfe maintaine Peace, preserve Life, resist Violence against Law, breach of Peace, parsuance of Felons. Traitours &c. But you will say the Law warrants all this, and from the petty Counstable to the Constables of Hundreds, and from them to the Sheriffes of Countyes and their combinations of the Insurrections, and Invasions bee too strong. I know the Objection will be the King commands it. I say no the Law is the Rule, and it began first at the People who choose their Officers to doe this, and Kings as Generalls have had the Ordering of all Armes, not by their wills, but knowne Lawes made in Councells of Kingdomes. VVords cause strife, and their multitude confusion, and I have observed these used and abused by the Dr. First powers. Secondly, Ordination. Thirdly Co-ordination Fourthly, Subordination. Fiftly, Supply, Sixtly, Reservation. Seventhly, Preservation. Eightly, Resolution. Ninethly, Conscience. 10. Subjection. 11. Resistance. 12. Damnation, a full Jury to condemne the Truth before a corrupt Judge, if not ignorant of what he sayes: for the Dr. having many Answerers to his &illegible; layes about him as in &illegible; to breake out with revenge, and Conscience in one conviction, as if that &illegible; for him as it does in the Ignorant, Malignant, repugnant, doubtfull, fearefull, and desperate. He speakes of a multitude of &illegible; persons with an implicite Faith, and blind Devotion, lead on by such Guides as they have chosen as are summoned by their Soveraigne, de grantoribus, & discretioribus &illegible; and his Majesty did ill to send to such as had no eyes to see whom they sent, and now being open behold what they have done, and the Senate being separated, and not dissolved, will not follow them that have deserted it, and the Divine as an Heretick, observed by Tertullien, does prius suadere, &illegible; docere, use his Rhethorick before his reason, and like &illegible; the Oratour begins with pastirut fellowes movers of Sedition, King-leaders of Sects. Act. 24. 1. I know not what Houses of Consultation he meanes to direct us to these evills, which he wonders they are not broken downe by divine vengeance; and the Churches should stand where so many blasphemous prayers, and preachings have been to blesse the Counsellours of such mischiefe. I professe freely what I see in the Ignorant, that have quiet, but no good consciences, they will not understand, or alter their opinion when they can say nothing for it, but their Consciences will not suffer them. The Malignant lead on by knowne Lawes against the Parliament, and the will of the King to declare them; as for example, hee declares the Papists are not to be disarmed but armed as his pleasure, and the Militia is wholly in his hands. He declares Delinquents are not to be punished that follow him in his Wars, because it is so enacted then be like the Parliament may declare who shall follow him in his VVarres, and not hee may make what Warres he will and because he cannot by a Vote dissolve the Parliament, he will doe it by violence, and that shall bee declared to bee Law. The Parliament can make no new Lawes without Him, therefore hee will make one, they shall doe nothing; and what they doe Hee hath power to make it void in Law. Thus reason the Malignants, and will have quiet consciences, but not good, least reason should convince them what they are; the plague of the Kingdome, to place all power in the King for no other end, but to serve theirs. Repugnant consciences. I pity and passe them by, we see evills, and dare not speake, would faine attend the Parliament but cannot for some service to their Soveraigne. Conscience is scarce good that waites in the Campe of the King by a private call, against a publique Summons by his VVrit to wait on him in his greatest Court, and what contentment can hee take in an Army that obeyes the King against his Kingdome, and grant that nothing shall be done by him in ordinary jurisdiction to crosse his great Councell, to doe what extra-ordinary occasions call them all unto; and if reason might render the law constant, ordinary jurisdiction is subordinate to Supreme, and though the King be a Supreme person in ordinary jurisdiction, yet his Supremacie is to be a Minister, Rom. 23. 4. to God and his People, and in the 3 Estates, to administer no Justice without them, nor to trust any to doe it disliked by them, Potesta, sitajuris est non injuriæ, Bract. Cok. Lex franum est regispotentiæ, and if that bee true of the Barons alone, debent regi frænum imponere in comitatu, as they are in his Traine, even of armed men, much more in consilio where the whole Kingdome is, but the Dr. would learne us that the Lawyer mends his fault, when he speakes not in favour of the Barons against Hen. 3. but Lawyer-like, Rex non habet superiorem. &c. the Dr. is at a nonplus, for his first words savour more of Law then his last, for in them he speaks of a Court, and then of a King, and gives them both their due of Supremacy, the Barons of a Councell the King of a Soveraigne; Par in parem non habet potestatem, multo fortius non habet superi rem. Well noted Dr, to your praise, that can find nodum in junco, a knot in a rush, and bid the skillfull in law, judge how well you have Answered Bracton with Bracton, he saies the King hath no equall in his Kingdome, that is no one man, but you say, Majestas cum suprema petestate con &illegible; est, and if Majestie be personall so is power. And yet you adde, Majestas &illegible; Romani, the popular Majestie of Rome, and you would give it the Parliament if they would have it; but such honour is for the King and the two Houses are ashamed of it or you rather ought to blush to make them Houses apart from the King, the King cannot do it though he would. They have him with them, would God in his Shining Royalty, as he is in his shadowed power I say so, because his body cast his shadow in no other place; there is Daniels Tree, Dan. 4. 12. wee must dwell under it, and are you the Watcher to cut it downe and leave us the dead stump.

To erect a Tyranny you destroy Royaltie and Loyalty. The Royall Office setled by Parliament is ministeriall, and the principall part of it is to order the Militia, not determine it. No States allow their Generalls such a power, and as the Senate doalt with Cæsar; so should he with them, not destroy them by the sword they have given him. Doubtfull soules are like to be ill resolved by you if you judge thus, and many are fearefull of the Kings anger, if his desperate followers should prevaile; and I am perswaded hew downe the Tree of our safety as you doe and no man that desires to be peaceable shall bee secure. I now come to the Verdul you bring in with your 12 Words. Powers you pervert, and make one all, for if God give the King all, and others have what he pleaseth, you make the Apostle speake vainly. Powers are Naturall, or Nationall, Naturall, universall or humane. Naturall in all Creatures, as Dragons and Beasts, and take heed you make not Kings so, for so saies Truth, they are when Men degenerate into them, and so are all your Monarchies figured, even that of the Episcopacie, Dan. 7. 2, 3. 24, 25. Rev. 12. 3. & 12. 1. 11. The two Episcopall Hornes are taken from the Lambe, and the Crownes and Thrones he hath given them. Rev. 4. 4. are fellow Cousens with Kings, and as a Councell or Synod may restrain the one, so may the Parliament and Senate of State moderate both. Nationall power is politicall or personall. The politicall flowes from that humane power we have forgotten, which is Paternall by creation, or fraternall by Birth, and from both flowes the Eldershpip, and from this the power that is personall, and so from the Senate you have these personall powers. First, an Emperour or Generall for the Warre. Secondly, a King for the Jewes. Thirdly, a Ethnarch for Name, for when Herod the King was dead, Mat. 2. 22. Archelaus reigned in his stead, which lost the name of his Father, and Cæsar called him an Ethnarch, for the Senate was jealous of Soveraignty; and as Cæsar durst not call himselfe what he was, so when he made &illegible; his governour, hee altered his Name to an Ethnarch, but both studied Supremacy against the Senate. Fourthly, they had presidents of provinces, and when they divided them they set up a fifth personall power, called the Tetrarch, because he governed the fourth part of a Province, and the Tetrarchle being divided againe, he that had any part of that was called a Toparch, and now good Dr. for shame be convinced that the great Councell of an Empire or Kingdome may dispose of all Officers; and beware you of the forth booke lest his Testimonies prove dangerous to your King, which you labour to make a Tyrant, that all tongues praise for a pious Prince, and such hearts have his Subjects to him that they stand amazed to thinke who hath bewitched him to doe as he doth, Sorcerie is in Papists by the Text, Rev. 9. 2. and will you teach it. We hope our Fasting and prayer will cast out this ill spirit of Malignants, and restore us againe our mercifull Prince, for I have heard hee hath earely in the morning made his Chaplins rise to goe to prayers with him, and I hope our Monica or mother shall be answered, as Ambrose answered for dustin, silius tantarion lachrymarum et precum, &c. the sonne of so great prayers and teares shall not be taken from us. Ordination of all powers are from God, for what wisdome is seen in the Governments of Men. The very plowman is instructed to discretion by God, Esa. 28. 26. and therefore Magistrates much more. God ordaines the powers mediately by men, which the Dr. denies, and some he ordaines by himselfe, as all the Patriarkes, Iudges, and two first Kings, and that may be the reason why David feared to kill Soul, as having no Commission to cut off him God had set over him and for my part I shall hold the same of Kings set up by men, which the Dr. feares, and by a false Title would secure him, but the truth is he is better secured by his Parliament then proud Prelates, that by divine right, would give too much to themselves, and to save them the King must hazzard his life and Crowne. Co-ordination of states startles the Dr. but stands firme, and though three be equall, yet all persons are not. That the Commons should be Comites, and Peeres, with Princes is a pretty jeere of a witty &illegible; but it wants something in sense, and to say soberly, the Commons are a third Estate, and the King stands no more above them then he does the Lords; but I have forgotten my selfe, the lower House of Parliament is the Kings &illegible; and he may set his Throne upon them, but the Dr. would have him set his foot upon their Necks, and then like the Pope, Aspidem et lconem &illegible; Psal. 91. 13. His contempt of the Commons cast them not so low, as they would goe to right the King in any thing, so they may &illegible; wrong the State they resemble. It is not honour they seeke for, but feare the hurt of the Kingdome, the date whereof is in their hand, and Forteseur speakes of them alone, with as much honour as of the Senate of Rome, which had but an hundred Senatours, this above 300. Subordination is as much abused by him as any other thing; for in sending Governours, 1 Pet. 2. 14. hee boldly applies it to the King, and that nothing without him may be done by them, when from God all Governours are charged alike, and to advance, the Kings authority makes it divine immediatly, and all others to have no more then he will give them: and for supply of Government, the people shall have no more by their Governours then they can get from him. Reservation they have none, and the plaine English is contrary to what is cast upon the Parliament against the King that he hath nothing. He can doe us no wrong, because the people are not capable to receive it, and that we have nothing to lose, because we had nothing of our owne; we are his by conquest, and it is he that grants us our lives, liberties, and lawes. Resolution is not finall without the King, they may determine nothing for Law that hee gaine-saies, and being deserted by him, they can doe nothing usefull for the Kingdome, be the necessities never so pressing. Conscience can bee resolved of no resistance by armes that he forbids, whosoever robs us of our right. Subjection must be to all the King commands, by the Text, either Active to doe it, or Pessive to suffer the penalty, but neither without a law made, or to be made: & seeing the law is not in his power, but the Parliament. And the Parliament saies there is none, to what then must I subject? The will of the King? Where does any Text say so? But I may not resist his will, and why so, seeing it is no law? And lastly, for damnation what need I care for that, when the Law condemnes me not? If cases of Conscience may thus be satisfied, the Dr. should not need to write, the knowne law is the will of the King.

An Answer to DOCTOR FERNE Vpon the case of Conscience.

Pray for us, for we are assured we have a good Conscience, willing in all things to walke honestly, Hebr. 13. 18.

The Conscientious Reader, to the Conscious Doctor

ARguments are the Subject of invention: Invention the first part of reason, and Reason the Resolution of all things. To resolve Conselence and satisfie it, he is one of a thousand that does it, Iob. 33. 23. An Interpreter must deale like a good physitian, seele the pulse, to know how the heart beats, Conscientia est scientia &illegible; deo. The heart is more deceitfull to it selfe then the Devill, and so desperately wicked, that the Dr. cannot find it out in himself, for all his confidence in his cause: I will put him in mind of the doubts hee hath not determined, or defined in the proposition, and without that the assumption of a good conscience will saile him. The Subject of Supremacy, right of Cesar, and resolution of Conscience, are scattered notes that stare the Reader in the &illegible; with damnation. God hath said it, Rom. 13. 2. and the sinne is Resistance opposite to subjection, which is for the object bound to powers, for the cause to God for the effect to the punishment of both, for the matter to good workes, for the form, care to doe them well for the end praise of the action, which being good in the rule, will bear out the doer to God Man, and his own Conscience. Tyranny is no Ordinance of God, and he that commands us to obey a King, does no where subject us to a Tyrant. Not to bee afraid of power is to doe well, and yet so to doe is the greatest feare. Rulers are no terror to good works, and therefore no Tyrants and Divines teach amisse that by resistance, restraine men from good, Did God by the terror of Senacherih restraine Hezekiah from Rebellion, 2 Knig. 18. 7. He told him his heart should meditate terror, Isa. 33. 18. and that his feare should be his treasure, vers. 6. the dssyrians as vermine, ver. 4. who having used violence as Caterpillars, should bee gathered as Wormes, and the Caldeans leape in upon them as Lecusts.

The DOCTOR talkes much of Conquest, and contracts with the People: for power to rule he holds needlesse, as being from God, and to be obeyed whatsoever he does. Such a Title had Seuacherib, and if the Dr. be serious, hee shall see how he hath mistaken Cæsar, and the Senate, and for the Subject of Supremacy, and Conscience of subjection hee hath wildly wandered out of the way in all his Texts, Rom. 1. 13. speakes of powers 1 Pet. 2. 13. Speakes of Kings as super-emminent, and the proper word for supreme, is, Act. 19. 38. νυατος, and yet but Cæsars deputy. There be six words descendent in the Romane Dignities and Dominions, Emperor, King, Ethnarch, President, Tetrarch, Toparch. All under the People and Senate of Rome. The Emperour was dugustus; Herod the King: Pilate President of Iudea; Philip the Brother of Herod Tetrarch of Iturta; Names usuall in the Scripture, and all of them granted by the People of Rome. Herod was made King by them before they had an Emperour; for Antonie craved that honour for Herod, and Cæsar had his afterwards, in the Sonate, where he made a long Oration, not tedious, for it took so with the people, that he having bin their Generall in the Wars, and conquered all the Nations to their hands, their hearts were so taken with joy, that they cryed a Cæsar, and set him above all their Lawes, which he modestly denyed, and deposited all his honours at their feete, and they like fooles forgetting they had expessed their Kings, will have a Cesar to rule above al law, and deifie him as a God, and so ever after who but Cesar, and to him they made all their appeases: and Paul being borne a Romme, by his priviledge appeales unto Cesar, and to this day our lawes &illegible; all in the Name of Cesar: yet the Apostle tells us of a βίμα besides Cesar, Act. 25. 10. a judgement seat which he had in Iudea, but Paul prudently avoids it, and takes the benefit of the Law, I stand not to Festus the President, nor Agryppa the King, I am a Romane, and to Rome will I goe, and be tryed by Cæsars Tribunall. It may be by the Peoples promise it was above the Senate, yet wee have expresse Testimonies after Augustus, that the Senate stood for their right, and was ever held above Cesar, Peter makes the King Supreme as Paul does, that we may appeale to his publique Judgement, and when the Law saies we appeale to the King; the meaning is not we stand to his Person or private Judgement, but his Publique and Politique, in his Courts of Justice; and the Parliament is the last in all appeales, and therefore the proper subject of Supremacy, and the King properly is Supreme in no other sence but the sore is this binds him to his Parliament and People, and makes them Soveraignes with him; and so questionlesse were the Senate and people of Rome, and all grants, went, Senatus populusque Romanus concestit. After Cæsar had the dignitie, the stile went, as now it doth with us, Concestimus, we grant because we doe it with our Senate; and this word the Scripture confirmes to be the most ancient Government, for what else is Senate but Eldership, and it comes from the Fathers of Families, and Elder Brothers in them, and this, and not Kings was appointed by God from the beginning; and God saies to discontented Cain, are not thou by birth thy Brothers Ruler, Gen. 4. 7. The Dr. shall see his answerers swerve not from truth as he does; and yet give Cæsar his right, if he will not take more then his due from the Eldership, from whom he hath all, and yet we keep to Cæsar and the Senate, and give Cæsar the Supremacy of Persons, and sole jurisdiction over all; yeilding all Freemen selfe preservation, and the Senate Supreme Jurisdiction. But you will say, how can two Supremacies agree? Very well by that distinction in Law, the King hath all ordinary jurisdiction, and in that all persons are private, that have not warrant from him, and Rebell if they practise any resistance to the Law. But we are to know the Kingdome hath an extra-ordinary jurisdiction in extra-ordinary times, extra-ordinary matters, and extra-ordinary dangers, and then the Kings ordinary jurisdiction ceaseth, and he may doe nothing without his great Councell, and if he refuse to operate with them, then they without him may use jurisdiction, and all the people their selfe preservation, so they doe nothing without the jurisdiction of the King or his Councell; and if the King will oppose his ordinary jurisdiction to that which is extraordinary, all hee does is void in Law, and the People with good Conscience may oppose him to preserve themselves, when the Parliament Orders it: And for the King to aske them by what Law they doe it; they have answered sufficiently by the fundamentall Lawes of all Nations, founded upon nature and the Eldership, which is the Senate. The Dr. is very angry, and calls to the Conscientious Readers, to see how Conscious he is, and culpable of blame for passion without compassion, and spoiles his owne Conscience by madnesse: For I never read such a Preface of a Booke to Conscience, See St. Pauls preface, pray for us Brethren, that we may the sooner be delivered out of Prison. This is humility which would have graced a Grave Dr. and not have set his Mortar on work to have pounded Assa fectida for fragrant Spices. His Mortar stinks abominably, and the smell will never out of his Booke; and we shall bray him to better purpose or breake him in pieces. From prayer I would carry him to assurance with the Apostle and from that to his obedience in a good Conscience, which is marked with 4 Characters. First a willing obedience to be Ruled by the Truth. Secondly, Vniversall to receive it in all things, and not with aliquid in a generall Proposition, that is true κ&illegible;τ πά&illegible;τος. Thirdly, constant to walke in the truth Fourthly &illegible;&illegible;λς, præclave, as honestly as he will, and then I conclude with him, Read, Consider, and carefully observe what is written, and the Lord give us patience and understanding in all things.

ACTIVE and PASSIVE Obedience to all Lawes, and their Penalties.

IUst Lawes have just punishments, and the penalties that are unjust, proceed from the pleasures of men, and their Tyranny over others. The Question is right stated for these times but scanned diversly. I propound the doubt as it is made by all. Whether if a Magistrate will not discharge his trust, but destroy Religion, Lawes, Liberties, and Lives, Subjects may not resist them? The Magistrate is mistaken, Rom. 13. 1. and he that reads one power for all powers, or gives the Epithite [Super-emminent] to Kings, abuseth the Scripture that gives it to Governours, 1 Tim. 2. 2. and when Kings have it by distribution, 1 Pet. 2. 13. it is doubtfull in the sence, whether the other Member bee meant of Subjects, vers. 14. The word sent considered with the end referres to GOD in praise and punishment, and he may wel be the author that appoints the end, and for his sake that sends Governours for the praise of the good and punishment of evill doers, we are to obey them, and so all Texts enjoine subjection to all powers in the abstract, and all Rulers in the Concrete, and to obey them further then they are of God, and for the good of men is to wring blood not Milke out of the Word, and so that Booke published by divers Divines, with approbatition in Parliament, passeth currant against the Dr. resolving conscience against truth, and yet he aimes at a Truth all men doe not heed of a Supremacy to be stated in some subject irresistible, or we shall never have the end of Government, 1 &illegible; 2. 2. in peace and quietnesse.

Worthy Hooker in his Preface to his policy, pleads with his Brethren to remove the scandall that yet remaines upon us, demands of them what judgement they will stand unto, their owne, or some other? The Scripture is the sure and silent Judge infallible to all, and in that supreme, but the peace and quiet of all States depends upon some Supremacie, not so infallible, yet as unavoydable, and that he sayes is neither King nor Bishop: but such Councells as both are subject unto, and that by the word of God directing and determining, Deut. 17. Act. 15. If in a Kingdome hard matters happen, that inferiour Courts cannot determine, the highest must, and all must subject unto it, even the King himselfe, whose judgement is not above, but under that judgement that determines all: and God never left his people to the will and determination of one man: and when Moses told them the judgement, it was not his owne, but Gods; and when hee speakes by one man the Law is supreme and infallible, when by many in a Councell it is supreme but not infallible; and for peace we cannot goe higher than the supreme Iudges: The word in the Acts translated Deputies, Act. 19. 38. comes of a word that signifies Supremacy more properly than that in Peter, for that sets forth a supereminent being not in the Superlative degree, but if words that admit comparison may be admitted for Arguments the Supremacy is in that word and yet the Translatour makes bold to render it a Deputy to the Romane Senate, or Cæsar, which is said by DIO to be above all, solutus Legibus loose from Lawes as wee would be in our opinions to hold what we list, and lawlesse men need a Parliament, a Senate, or a Synod to set them right if not in judgement, yet in peace to hold their hands and tongues to the good behaviour. It is well knowne that Augustus Cæsar pleased the people with a long Oration to lay downe his power in policy, and willed the people to free him of the burden, which they would not, and though they created not a King, yet they consented to an Emperour, and the fixt Dynastie they understood not, as Gratian did when he yeilded up the Priesthood, that the Pope might succeed him in the seventh head of the Beast. Tyberlus the Successour of Augustus askes in the Senate a part of the Empire, and a Senatour answers him what part he had a minde unto, knowing he meant the whole: but how ever the Cæsars played with the people, yet the Senate stood to their right, and if Supremacy be not in the highest Councell, all Lawes of God and men are subverted.

For proofe of this we goe to God and nature, Nations and the Families that have made them, of Elders comes Eldership, and it by Creation or Generation. Creation gives it to our Parents. Generation to the elder Brother, Gen. 4. 7. Cain is the Ruler of his brother by his Birth, and God in these two rankes placeth Kings for Rule and affection, Exod. 20. 12. Deut. 17. 15. Marke the words of Election in Israel, it is Gods, contrary to Creation, Saul and David were of his Election, and the one objected his Familie, 1 San. 9. 21. Honourable for his Mother, but meane for the sinne and suffering of his Tribe. He came of Rachell, and was of the Tribe of Benjamin, and now in contempt for that horrible crime of conspiracie with the Sonnes of &illegible; Iudges 20. &illegible; and yet God free from all Lawes makes choyce of the meanest Family, and Saul is the first man he fixeth upon for a King, and yet with consent of the people; and the words are emphaticall, in placing thou shalt place, and it shall be of thy Brethren. In the Election of David the Law of Nature is not followed neither did Abner observe the Law, &illegible; Sam. 2. 9. nor David in Solomon, after whom it went by Succession, and Soveraignty was not naturall, nor paternall, nor fraternall, but positive and popular. God gave the Law for his people, and willed them to follow it, but never appointed for all Nations any forme of Government: and that which is most naturall, and best approved of God in Church and State is an Eldership, Num. 11. 16. Rev. 4. 4. The one is a Senate of seventie with Moses, and the other a Presbytery of many with one Angell. They have both one Nation, and I take it from the Heathen to shew natures direction to a supreme Demosthenes for the Grecians, and Cicero in Cato, for the Latines shew us the true Subject of Supremacy to be the Senate. Apud Lacedæmontos, qui &illegible; Magistratum gerunt, ut &illegible; sic etiam appillantur, Senes, among the Lacedæmonians, which bore the chiefe Magistrate, as they are, so also they are called Elder-men. Ratio & prudentia nisi essent in senibus, non summum consilium majores nostri appellassens Senatum, if reason and prudence were not in old men, our Ancestours had never called the highest Councell a Senate, and this was Gods wisedome in the Nation he chose, and made it the patterne of all Nations, Deut. 32. 8. He divided them as his owne Sonnes, and they were no more in number than the soules he sent into Egypt; and when Moses had brought them from that place, and was weary of their burden, God erected the Senate of seventy, and makes the judgement of it the highest in Israel, Deut. 17. for direction v. 9. Observation, v. 10. Limitation, v. 11. Death, v. 12. Example, v. 13. And it is well knowne that such Warres as God commanded not, were permitted by this Councell, and the King without it might not attempt any. The ruine of Cæsar is the advancement of Antichrist, and in succession both are Enemies to Christ. The one under the notion of a Dragon, Rev. 12. 3. The other of a Beast, Rev. 13. 11. and this Beast rules another that receives the Crownes of the Dragon. The Dragon had seven, the Beast ten, Rev. 13. 1. The Mystery manifest to us, as having seen them all. 7. Dynasties of the Romanes. They began with a King, and for Tyranny tooke him away, and being troubled with other formes of Government, fall to Monarchy againe, and the Cæsars end in Antichrist, 2. Thess. 2. 7. He is taken away, and the man of sinne advanceth, and as a false Prophet moulds Kings to his mind, and the combination is a confederacie against Christ: and I dare make it a generall Doctrine from the Prophet, Isay 8. 9. that Idolatrous Associations shall bee broken. They are two in the Text, Samaria, and Syria, against Syon. Iudah and Assyria against them. The King of Assyria as a River shall fill all channells, and runne over the bankes, and so overflow in Iudah till he come to the neck, and then God will choake him, and save Syon, for those that say no confederacy with sinners, but sanctifie the Lord in their hearts, and make him their Sanctuary, when the rest stumble as Houses that harbour Idolaters. Such are all at this present as rejoyce in Papists, the greatest Idolaters that ever were, Rev. 13. 6. for as yet never Nation came to that height of horrible blasphemy. First, in the name of God. Secondly, his Tabernacle, Thirdly, his Saluts. The Name of God is blasphemed in Images. First, when they give his name unto them. Secondly, his prayse, for they give them divine VVorship, as Latris &illegible; all the Images of the Trinity, Dulia to all the pictures of the Saints, and hyperdulia to the blessed Virgin. The Tabernacle of the Divine nature of Christ is mans Humane nature, Iohn 1. 14. Hebr. 8. 2. and 9. 11. This they presume to make, offer, adore, which being not in the power of man they blasphemously undertake to doe, contrary to the Texts, and that, Hebr. 9. 14. where not man, but the eternall Spirit offers what is made without hands.

As the Divine and Humane natures in Christ are foulely abused, so the best of Saints that dwell in Heaven, change Thrones with Christ, and from his Trone to his Fathers Throne are set in Office of Intercession, Rev. 3. 21. a thing the Apostle expresseth, 1 Tim. 3. 16. for what is the glory of Christ in his Ascension, but Mediation for the redeemed, which the Gentiles beleeved and by Apostasie grant to the dead. 1 Tim. 4. 1. To know the time nothing is taught more plainely than by Cæsar, and Antichrist. I wonder not that Augustus was a Monarch and Dynast of a divine Prophesie, not to shew how God delighted in such Dominions, for we are told of Crownes and Diadems removed from the Tribe of Iudab, Ezech 21. 26. 27. when Christ came Herod had the Crowne, and the People of Rome gave it him, and Cæsar to oppose him and Christ, was called by the Jewes their King, but not so allowed by the Senate; and yet he was no lesse by the peoples inconstancy, but the Senate gave him no such power, for when Tyberius would have had them create Christ a God, they refused it, telling him that not he but they had the power to delare the approbation of any God; and to Nero they shewed such power as to resist his Tyranny by Armes; and I dare conclude that the proper Subject of Supremacy, is the supreme Councell of any Kingdome, and it slowes from the Fathers of Families, and under them to their eldest Sonnes, and at this day in French, Italian, and Spanish, the word Signor, out of which comes, Seignourie, signifies Lordship and Dominion, and no wayes defaceth Monarchy, for as Seneca sayes, potestas ad Cæsarem pertinet, proprietas ad singulos, Power may bee given the Emperour, and yet every man may possesse his owne, and have remedie and right against Cæsar by the Senate, and to subdue either was Tyranny, which it seemes the people choose, as Israel did, 1 Sam. 8. 5. The thing protected against &illegible; 9. and declared in five words to bee a sore judgement. First, &illegible; he shall take from you. Secondly, disponee sibi, he shall dispose of it to his owne will. Thirdly, dabit aulicis, hee shall give it his Courtiers. Fourthly, clamabitis, yee shall cry. Fiftly, non exaudiam, I will not heare. There is another judgement different from this, 1 Sam. 10. 25. called the Kingdome; judgement, and it belongs to the supreme Court, Deut. 17. 8. It handles all hard matters, and sheweth the judgement to all Inferiour Courts, commands obedience, inflicts death and is for all to heare, feare and doe no more so presumptuously. Hence we learne a two fold Supremacy; the one personall, the other Politique; the one of the King, and the other of the Kingdome; both arbitrary, but not equally righteous. The Royall Supremacy is seldome without Tyranny, and in it we may observe two things: the peoples Petition and Gods Concession. In the peoples Petition is the rejection of &illegible; or a Divine Dynastie in the happy Government of the Church, and a sullen resolution for a Monarchy, to be ruled as the Nations. Gods concession is with a solemne Protestation against it, and a just provocation for it, to punish his people pleased with Tyranny. The people heare the hard conditions, 1 Sam. 8. 19. and refuse to obey Samuel, and are bound to their King, be he never so bad, and there is no remedie but in the judgement of the Kingdome that cannot be dissolved, for the Lord had constituted that before ever he granted them a King, and because they had suffered this to decay; for we never heare of it till good Iehoshaphat restored it, 2. Chron. 19. 8. In this King were two great faults: Affinitte with Ahab, 2 Chron. 18. 1. and the help, and love of Idolaters, 2 Chron. 19. 2. These caused wrath to his Posterity, and the good things in him to reforme Religion, and repaire the Courts of Justice, stayed Gods anger: but the errour followed, and his Sonne sinned as Tyrants used to doe, and judgement failed till judgement brought captivitie, and captivity from the Crowne to the Diademe, and from brethren to strangers, the whole Government was devolved, and Herod and Cæsar set up by the Senate ruled them, which had the like changes that the great Councell in Israel had. Paul was asked if he would be judged by his owne Nation, and he appeales unto Cæsar, whose Tribunall Calvine thinks to bee a corruption of the Senate, but then we know it had Dominion over Cæsar, and deposed Nero, but after Nerva it was ruled by the Sword: but by right the rule was in it, and an Eldership is the most naturall Government, both in the Church, and Common-wealth.

I shall now deale with sixe Bookes of Supremacy. Five of them are against Doctor Ferne, who fights under the Royall Standard against the Parliament, and begins his Book to the Conscientious Readers, whom he resolves by the cleare light of the Law of God, and the Land, and complaines of foure Answerers with such anger, that he brayes them in a mortar, to beate out of their brains pretences that hood-winck, and blinde Devotion, contrary to Conscience desirous of Information. Letting passe his passions, I shall with the same compassion examine his Principles, and answer punctually such passages, as may resolve the doubts of the discourses of all the six Authors. We shall never state the Question as the case is, unresolved of the Subject of Supremacy; wheresoever it is the Government will be Arbitrary, and Irresistable. Arbitrary for Law, and irresistable by Armes. In the Judgement of the King bee may doe what he will with slaves. Seignourie saith (saies Seneca) is either potestas & impertum, or proprietas & Dominum. To the first a Subject is a correlative, and where there is power and Command, Subjection is necessary. To the other the opposite is to be a slave, who hath nothing but what the will of his Master will allow him: But where there is propriety or Mastership, he that takes ought from the owner without his consent, makes him his Vassall, and though Sonnes and Servants be not slaves, yet the one is owner of nothing, and the other hath not the freedome of a Sonne. Iohn 8. 35. Servants may be turned out of their Masters Houses, and Sonnes that abide as Heires, have such portions as their Fathers will allow them, Doctor Ferne tells us of naturall obedience, and so much is in 24. H. 8. c. 12. a Law not so naturall as to cast us upon the King, to stand to his good will what he will give us, for in Kingdomes Children lay up for their Father, and recompence his care, and receive not their Portions from him, but have them by the same Freedome hee hath his Kingdome, but the Doctor would faine from the Family, fixe the Fathers full power upon the King to rule his Subjects, and it is the Argument the Pope useth, to exempt himselfe from Kings, he is the Father of the Church, begets his children, hires his Servants, and shall Sonne or slave cast him out of his owne house? As for Kings, they come in by the consent of the People, and may againe by them be cast out of their Kingdomes. The Doctor deales just so for his Soveraigne, he sets him up as a Father, and all his Subjects, for such Sonnes and Servants as must abide his good will and pleasure: wee may grant him his power, and such a Seignourie as his Sonnes must owne with him, nay, be the owners and be their Feoffee in trust. But we have not yet stated the Subject of our Supremacy, the King is no such Soveraigne with us, as he may doe with us what he list. We have a proprietie in our Goods and Lives, and are not at the Arbitrary disposition of the King, we have given him no such consent, as the people did, 1 Sam. 8. 19. 20. to be over us, judge us, and fight for us as he pleaseth. No such Arbitrary power is in him, we have left that in the judgement of the Kingdome, 1 Sam. 10. 25. The Kings of Israel by Gods direction might fight with such Nations as God had given them: but to fight with their owne people, or any other he had not directed them unto, might not be done without the judgement of his Kingdome. This present Parliament is so farre from devesting the King of the Militia, that they desire to give him a power to command the whole Militia in the Kingdome, in such an orderly and effectuall way, as legally he had not before, and that all those might obey him to whom it was committed by consent, and that they might assist him in the protection of all his good Subjects in their persons and Estates according to Law, not against it, by keeping Delinquents from summons, and proceedings of his highest Court, and that he himselfe will be the sole Judge of all the necessities and dangers of the Kingdome, and that his great Councell may not, judge with him, of the time when, the cause why, the meanes by which, the manner how, or the end for which he makes Warre. Truely if the Subject of Supremacy be stated, we shall neither Arme with the judgement of it, or resist it by Armes, neither will wee seeke for knowne Lawes further than the Legislative power in it.

I know the Bookes I have mentioned follow (I will not say sancy with the the Doctor) but some variety of opinion. I must needs dislike him &illegible; at holds the Deposition of Kings, and next him wee are to thinke seriously of the resistence of the Supremacy, lest Subjects rise up in Armes, and rebell: but when they are commanded by the Supremacy, to count that Rebellion in the Subjects, is the Doctors dangerous determination. Plus peccat &illegible; quam Actor, and it beseemes not a Divine to dash them with &illegible; that are Instruments to the Supreme Powers, and are justified by their Commands. He will finde the Arbitrary power to be in the Parliament from the Legislative power, to make and interprete all the Lawes of the Kingdome; and being a Court of Justice, it is never deprived of this power without a dissolution, and if the King will not concurre with his owne judgement, he cannot deny it in the ends for the which he hath called it, which are two. First, Questions upon doubts of Lawes, which are never resolved by the King in any Court, but his Judges; for as they are above Him in the skill, so they are below him in the prosecution, and judged voyd in Law; for where the Subject hath no remedy, there he can have no right, as against the Person of the King, and so there shall be wrong done by the King, and no Law to right the oppressed, and punish the wrong doer. He therefore of all Persons is so farre (solutus Legibus) loose from lawes that as injury cannot be done to him, so neither may he doe it to any others. For the second end it is to heare complaints of injuries, and the Parliament may redresse them though the King will not consent. He calls them to consider of the hardest matters, and dangers that are instant and extant, and they may exercise their power to prevent them, or restraine them. Be it Tyranny in the Monarchy, for as they may moderate it in the meanes, so they may master it in extremitie, and to thinke of the Parliament, as a power lesse being, and that all Actions are voyde, the King denies is to leave all Justice to the will of one man, and injurie to bee done without remedie. The King will have it so, is never asked, but to new Bills. The two Houses need not Petition the King to declare Law, resolve such doubts as are brought them, and right wrongs, done to the Subjects, and in case of necessaie provide for the Kingdomes safety. And now let us see the Sections.

Sect. 1. The Case, and the Question upon it stated.

I Will note the Materialls, and letting the supposition goe, the Position is full of pindust, and the Doctor blowes it in his owne eyes to blind his first Section with Subjects for Parliament, King for Rebells, and the case without the Cause. He will not charge the Parliament, but the People with the Warre, not the Supremacy of the Kingdome, but the Subjects against it. The VVarre must be against the King, and not against Rebells. The Case must be the Kings trust, as if that were the cause of the VVarre, because hee will not discharge it. Subjects may take up Armes, Subjects may resist. Some thinke so, and the Doctor hath not seene the Book that proves it, saying, resistance is onely forbidden to just and Legall Commands, and he that does so deserves damnation: but the subversion of Religion, Lawes, and Liberties is so farre from any power of God, that it is rather as Braston saies, a power of the Divell. Rex Vicarius Des est dum facit justitiam, minister autem Diabole, dum declinet ad injurtans, and he that is forbidden to resist God may resist the Divell, and the Dragon his instrument. Rev. 12. 7. Constantine and Theodosius fought with the Dragon, and both against Emperours. The one against Maxentius at the request of the people, and the other with &illegible; in the behalfe of Christians, and there be more examples of fighting with Tyrants than the Doctor will ever be able to answer. But I need not arme the Subjects against Supremacy, they are armed by it against Rebells, and not against the King, and if the Sheriffe of the Shire may preserve the peace, pursue Rebells by the Lawes, shall not the Law-makers doe it much more? They send Serjeants at Armes for Delinquents, and if they will arme against them, and raise Armies, the Parliaments power by the people may master them. As for the Kings trust, we have better rules then compulsion to force him to it, or repulsion to restraine his will from his own actions. The rule is, Quod nostrion est, sine nostro consensu, facto vel defecta à nobis tolli, amitti, sen in alios transferri, non potest. The Parliament hath here claime enough to the Kings trust. First, it is common to them both in the same Supremacy. Secondly, hee hath consented to trust them with his owne trust. Thirdly, the Mis-user of any publike trust may forfeit it to the Parliament. Fourthly, the Non-user of his trust deserves to loose it to them that have power to use it better. Fiftly, desertours of both Houses cannot deprive them of their right to remedie things amisse. Sixtly, every mans talent is for publique good, and he may loose it that will not so use it, or have it taken from him if he abuse it. Lastly, that which is neither grantable, nor forfeitable, may be in the use transferred to others. It’s true, the Crowne of the King is neither grantable nor forfeitable to any person. King Iohn granted his Crowne to the Pope, and it was voyde in Law, and so are all Prerogatives Royall: as for example, 20. Hen. 7. fo. 8. a, a grant of power to pardon Felons by the King to another, it not good in Law, for that it is a prerogative annexed to the Crowne, and cannot bee severed from it. We say of the Parliament, that it is totus populus, totion Regnum, and therefore what the King cannot grant to any person, may be granted to the Parliament, as the King hath granted to this Parliament a power to dissolve it, and the Parliament once in three yeares may be called without the King, which he could not grant by his personall prerogative, but with the consent of both Houses any thing may be done, that the whole may doe. The State then of the Question truely put, the Parliament may arme the People against the personall Commands of the King, to resist them that seduce him, and subvert Religion, Lawes and Liberties; and let the Doctor answer this and his owne Conscience to defend the contrary.

Sect. 2. The fancied frame of Government.

THe Doctors conceptions are confusions, and for due Order he destroyes the Testimony of a Father, and Philosopher, which the University will hisse him out of the Schooles for the one, and the Pulpit for me other. Aug. de civ. Dei cap. 23. pepidui est aetus Lominum juris consensu & utilitatis communione sociatus, the people are a company of men associated together by the consent of Law, and communion of profit. We must conceive this for the first foundation passing from Families. Fathers and Elders: yet being all body and no head, are called, &illegible; an headlesse multitude; and therefore Aristotle makes up the Argument, quandocunque ex pluribus constituitur unum inter illa, unum erit Regens, & alia erunt recta, whensoever of many Members one is constituted amongst them, one part shall rule, and the rest shall be ruled. Marke the Originall in the coalition where it begins by consent, and that is mutuall, inter illa, a mongst them. We say the heart is the first thing that liveth, and the lost tha dieth, and such is the intention of the people in their constitution, then they thinke of some Head, and Lawes as Ligaments to knit them together, and all for common good. The Doctor may read this lesson at leisure, and the fuller answer needs not blush to looke upon either Parliament or people. The Supremacy of the two Houses include the King, as all Courts of Justice doe, where he is fons justillæ, a Fountaine of Justice filled, and filling. He receives his influence from the people juris consensu, and nothing is Law without their consent. The very Election is theirs, and there they begin, and are deposited in the head, as vitall Spirits that warme the animall, and incite them like lightning to shine and dart thorough the sinewes, to set sense and Motion on worke, and keepe the watch in the Tower for the safety of all that dwell in the City. In manu Regis suit omnia jura, he is the hand to dispense to all, and every one right and equall Justice. As he is in the Inferiour Orbes, so he must turne without the Supreme, and the Supremacy is made of three Estaies, as glorious Starres that shine together: and why it should shame the Honourable Houses to bee thrice Honourable in the highest Sphære, as the fuller Answer hath placed them, let the Doctors eyes dazle him that envies the Sun to shine the more brightly in the midst of the Starres, which know how to stoupe to their Soveraigne as Subjects, when they in the Supremacy of the Legislative power, are co-ordinate with him, and the Subjects may thanke them, too that the Arbitrary power is past Tyranny in so well tempered a State, and duly poysed a Parliament. Conscience complaines of Reasons, conviction in the Doctor, that would have one against Law to governe them that make it, for how knowes he the King chalengeth no obedience due to him, that hee would teach with the Emperour to say, quod ego volo pro Canone sit, when indeed his Commands with both Houses are Law, and without them none at all. It’s well his skill is yoked with the affirmative, and how shall Conscience bee sure he affirmes any thing that may satisfie it. His Negative is to tell conscience the King hath not this or that power, and yet the people must obey it, and as for the Parliament he may conclude without offence, their power is but begged for them by an ill Advocate, yet he will grant them something for pity, lest they prove poore, and so the two Houses are co-ordinate with the King, ad aliquid, to some Acts of Supreme power, and what is that? in a word, in that power which containes all the power in the Kingdome; for so I am sure the Legislative power doth, which the Philosopher calls Architeitonicall, at the Arch-builder with the line and measure like him, Rev. 11. 1. The Disciple receives the Reed like a Rod and it measures all that opposeth the moneths of Apostasie; and surely the rule in Parliament passeth for the judgement of the whole Kingdome, and what the Kings judgement is above it, besides it, without it, or against it, let the Dr. teach it that dreames of other mens fancies, and not draw Conscience from the subjection of the Higher powers, which so frequently he translates, Rom. 13. 1. the Higher power, and in his former Book, but once mentioneth powers.

Sect. 3. The Originall of Governing power, and how it begins in England.

COnscience is put to an hard taske, and contrary to the Apostles direction in doubtfull Disputations, Rom. 14. 1. If the Dr. in this Section had kept his Faith to himselfe, but he will shew his Learning Lawyer-like, and begin with Cadmus and Orpheus for matter and Melodie, and bring men together as wild fruits spring out of the Earth, but Providence gives the patterne, and from paternall power, duitu naturæ, by natures leading, we come to Monarchy, before ever the people associated themselves, and so they had an Head before they were a Body, and yet by the Father and the Philosopher; we see the people agreed upon an association, and came together before they thought upon an head. We know Families made Villages, and had wells and wayes common, and so Vuus seems to be of via & Pagas a π&illegible;&illegible;υ&illegible;. From such small beginning of wayes and wels they came to wals, and called their habitations oppida ab opibus, for riches, or opponendo, because they walled their towns against oppressours. And so Vibs ab Vibe, from the plough laying the surrow for the circle and compasse of the Citie, and this word Civitas in the abstract of Civit, in the concret, of Coivit, comming together, and all this while without Kings; though Cam and Nimrod were the Gyants of the World, and builded Cities to save themselves from destruction, which they brought upon others, and fell at the length into it themselves, Prov. 21. 16. in cætu Gigantum. The Rephaims of the old World Gen. 6. 4. were men of renowne and the mighty men that rebelled against God, and Hell received them. Fortescue is found faulty by this Dr. and he denies the Governing power to be from the people, and his Reason is, because it is from God, and who contradicts that, yet how is that contrary to the people in their consent? Doe they not associate juris consensu, and constitute one Body amongst themselves, and agree of their Rulers? It’s plaine the first Fathers were Kings, so plaine as the Booke of God no where sayes it, and his Reason from Noahs Senors is raised upon the sand, and sinkes in the seventy Nations, for who was their King? Moses tells us of their number, Gen. 32. 8. and how God divided them: but nothing is said who had the Dominion, neither doe we read how God appointed them Kings. We read of Tidal King of Nations, Gen. 14. 9. and of Nimrod a mighty hunter. Gen. 10. 9. but who gave them the honour? we heare the Dr. say it, and doubt of the doctrine and Conscience is poorely convinced to yeild to a King as such a Father, as may rule his Children at his will, that they may neither choose him, nor their Laws to live under. I should weary the Reader to shew him how certaine this man is. Sometimes it is plain by the Book of God, hence it appeares Monarchy, &c. It was likely &illegible; the &illegible; the people choose theirs Rulers and the irregular war went with Chain, and declined paternall right. When the Royall line failed by naturall descent, the people being fore they gave not the power, but still the King is chosen as a Father, and yet naturall Children choose not their Father: and the distracted Dr. saies he knowes not what, but as in a Trance travailes of a Birth, and it proves wind, and words of no worth. Having roved up and down the World, he walkes at length home againe, and cals Conscience to contrived Coalitions of most needlesse disputes, and ends in a Statute, That this Realme of England has been accepted for an Empire, governed by one Supreme head, unto whom a body Politique, compait of all sorts and degrees of people, of the spiritualty, and temporalty, are bound to beare, next to God a naturall obedience. Matrimonie is by contract, and the King is, sponsus regni, 2 Sam. 5. 1. we are thy bone and thy flesh, and David made a League with them, ver. 3. and they apointed him King over Israel. A faire contract, and naturall obedience will not conclude a naturall Father, with whom the naturall Children may not condition: but these may, and the King is bound to keepe his Covenant, if he will oblige Conscience to consent. Mr. Skeene in his booke de Exposidone verborum, makes Legeance a mutuall and reiciprocal bond and obligation betwixt King and Subjects, and if the Dr. will by the Oath of dilegiance parswade subjection, let him now with the King perswade him to protection. Fleta lib. 1. Cap. 27. sayes an out-Lawed Man hath caput &illegible; a Wolles head, and any man might kill him, as out of the Kings protection. I dare not say, if the King will not protect, I may deny duty, though Bookes say so much, and Bracton makes a Tyrant no King, and saies obedience is due to a King, not to a Tyrant, and relation saies, pretectio trahit subjectionem, and Subjectio protectionem and so e contra. All I wish that Kings may not be flattered by false friends, nor his best friends, destroyed by partiall doctrines. His Exposition of Bracton from Sir Edward Cooke, of Earles and Barons, and their honour, helpes not the effluxe of power from the People, because the Sword and Robe is not theirs.

Reges &illegible; sibi &illegible; Barones ordinantes cos in magna honore. I do not well understand he Doctors drift, what he drives at by these words. I conceive he meanes the people have no reserved power in Parliament, seeing the creation of the Lords is not before the King, for hee is the cause of their honour. What then? hinders this the effluxe of power from the People, seeing the Lords have their honour from the King? The grant of grace is more then is borne with that family, yet Noble Families may be before Kings, and Kings by them may be chosen by consent, with the free multitude and both may concurre to make a King. All the Elders that meere to make David a King, might be the chiefe of the people, and at each Coronation the people are asked their consent, shewing in succession the first Institution to have beene by Election; for the Paramount power in Peeres more will be said anon. For his Conclusion of a supposed contrivement and reservation Conscience needs not that which hee counts groundlesse, for the resistance made by Parliament is warrant enough to the people, both for selfe peservation, sincere protestation against Papists, and Malignants both to King and Kingdome. His overthrow of the Co-ordination in all things to make one Supremacy, and the Supply of it by desertion of persons, who cannot remove their powers, for the persons in the House of Commons, may be contracted to fourty, and the Lords to fewer, and yet in those the Supply is sufficient and for the person of the King; His consent to the Act of continuance is enough to keepe his power to Co-ordinate with both Houses, to yeild them the Supremacy of the Kingdome and the Arbitrary government that goes along with is and the fiction is his own that gives the King any Supremacy above the 3 Estates: which are either all in the Parliament, or by discontinuance any one whole Estate may dissolve it, and if the whole King be out of it, it is no Court, for where the King is not, their Justice cannot be administred. All appeales are to Cæsar, that is, to his Iudgement Seat, not his person, and if Cæsar be not in his Parliament, how can it reverse the judgment of any other Court; or how may any man appeale to the Parliament for Justice, if Cæsar be not in it by the Doctors Divinity, and if hee bee in any higher Tribunall let the Malignants make use of it; if they cannot, let them consider what enemies they are unto Cæsar, that cast down his Tribunall; and let the Dr. resolve me by his learning, act. 25. 10. what is meant by βήμα, if hee say the Senate, then Cæsar is in it or Paul cannot Appeale unto him. If with &illegible; some other Tribunall appointed by Nero, let him tell us what it is in England, for certainely the Doctor would make the King contrary to his nature a Nero, to hold a judgement seate above the Parliament, which hee must appeale unto, or his hopes in the two Houses will &illegible; him, if ever he appeare there, for this second Booke bids him beare his owne burden, for being so busie with his betters.

Sect. 4. Of the Co-ordination of the 3. Estates, and of the Supremacy of Power.

VVEE shall justifie the Co-ordinatour for no Contriver, and though Monarchy have but one Monarch, yet it may bee mixt and moderate, and no meere Empire. Co-ordinata ad omnia in the Legislative power, and that is the whole power of Parliament, and the great Supremacy of the Kingdom. The Parliament does all by the Nomotheticall power, which is to make and expound Lawes, and punish their breach in all great Officers of the Kingdome, that have been a plague to the people. A power Architectonicall is Supreme, and what is Supreme supplies all wants, and is the highest wee can goe. It’s most true, the King is onely Supreme head and Governour in the Apostles sence, when he appeales to Cæsar, and all Lawyers teach mee that all appeales must be from Cæsar to Cæsar and he must administer Justice in all places. So Bracton treating of Jurisdiction saies, sciendum est, we must know that the King onely and no other, if he alone may suffice, to bound by his oath and office to doe all: Sed si Rex &c. But if the King alone cannot suffice to determine all Causes; ut sevior sit illi labor, &c. that his labour may be the lighter, he may appoint Iustices, to whom, as well deaths in Law may bee referred; as complaints, upon injuries, &c. Now if Cæsar doe wrong in one Court, Cæsar may right it in another, and hee suffers his Subjects to seeke remedy from wrongs and injuries in all Courts, till they come at the highest, and still his Oath is after the remedie of mischiefes and inconveniences in Parliament, &illegible; let there be added to the &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; what things shall be past: by meanes whereof if Cæsar doe wrong in one Parliament, he may be appealed unto in another. He is the only Supreme Governour to goe to, but not in his person but in his policy: If his person transgresse, his policy must supply the defect, and the Dr. does nothing in this Section but play with his wit. He would have calling and dissolving to be a Supremacy, and the beginning of every statute, and the Parliaments Petition to passe the Bill, &c. He would same make shift to say something to the Co-ordinatour, but he is curbed by Cæsar and his Judgment Seat; and hee would saine set him a stoole to sit downe by himselfe, and in all likelihood will sooner give his Majestie a fall, then establish his Throne in righteousnesse. He gathers up scattered proofes, and speakes parables, that not Monarchy but Government is mixt. Hee told us before our English Government was a Monarchy, and now it is none, but the Monarchy is meere and absolute, and the Government mixt and conditionate. Hee hath a predominancy in the supremacy, yet not arbitrary in his Majestie, and to say a Monarchy is compounded of 3. Estates is absurd, either it is mixt of three, or purely one, and then absolute and Arbitrary, and the King may doe what hee list. I might touch many notes to make the Dr. notorious in his distinctions without differences, and dancing up and downe to get out of his owne nets. His Native and Dative Lords doe him little service in Parliament, except he would teach the King to imitate the Pope in the Councell of Trent, and create such dearlings as &illegible; the Bishop of 5. Churches speakes of, that matters in the Councell came to passe by hungry Bishops of honour, that king upon the Popes sleeve, and were created on the sudden by the Pope for the purpose, that that Councell seemed to be an assembly, not of Bishops, but Hobgoblins, not of men, but of Images moved like the statues of &illegible; by the sinewes of others. Borne Counsellors to the State, or created, may be said to have a native Nobility because they are not chosen as the Commons, but come as right Heires of that honour to Vote in Parliament, and freely to promote the utility of their Countrey. &illegible; in &illegible; or Peers in the County, Co-ordinate not with the King, nor yet saies he have the Relation to the Parliament in those words of &illegible; Rex habet curiam superiorem, that is, the Court of Barons without Commons, who were as a bridle to curbe Hen. 3. It may be the Dr. is right, and the Barons wronged the King, but the Parliament I am &illegible; hath a great power to chastise corrupt Counsellors to the King, for it is over them we place the Supremacy, and not the King. Majestas popul Romani, is matter of no moment, neither doe I thinke his multitude of words worth any longer worke in this Section.

Adigression to the Doctors Equivocations, and verball contentions.

COnscience will never bee resolved by Equivocation of words, and mentall reservations are worse. I believe the Dr. is an honest man, and of a sound heart, and meanes to delude neither King nor Kingdome, Parliament, or people, and yet he equivocates in 7. things, Names, Number, Nature, Order, Office, Action, and End. I said we are Gods in name and to some purpose, but to pull downe your pride, you shall die like Men. Good Kings would doe as God bids them, and beware as men in the common condition how they die; for their death is as sure as others, but most damnable if they depart Tyrants, and Christian princes most of all should be warned by the word of the Text, Psal. 82. 7. fall like one of the Princes: that is, his owne Judges in Israel should no more be spared then Pagans. Here we have Gods in name ad &illegible; to some purposes, but the name will not change them from men: But the Names in Parliament that expresse it, as, Ordines, potestates, status, sunt ad omnia, they agree in all things. They are Orders to the same purpose. Powers to the same performances; States to the same establishment of the Kingdom. Our Saviour for the &illegible; satisfies the Iows of his actions, that they are answerable to truth Ioh. 5. 19. equall with God was the peoples mistake & yet his mind and meaning was so, and he proves it by his works, not confounding the order of persons: So I say all the Orders powers, States, work the same thing in Parliament without confusion. The King is the first in Order, but not in Power, and it may be so in the presbytery, Rev. 4. 4. the Bishop is the first in order, but not in power to doe what he will, but what all will doe, and here I might regulate Votes in Parliament as in all Councells, Quod major pars curiæ effect, pro vato babetur &illegible; omnes &illegible; what the greater part of the Court shall doe, that is ratified, or to stand for they Judgment of the Court, is if all bad done the same, Dig. lib. 50. leg. 19. And again, &illegible; ad &illegible; quod publice fit per majorem partem that is accounted the act of all, which is publikely done by the greater part, Dig. lib. 5. Tit. 17. de Reg. Juris 160. Vpon the equity of this rule the Councell of Chalcedon, when ten Bishops dissented from the rest. Act. 4. p. 90. b. said, honest justum decem audiri, ten must not be heard against a thousand and two hundred, and so proceeded the fifth generall Councell, Col. 6. p. 576. &illegible; Maximus, &illegible; and the Legates of Leo, were no hindrance to the Fathers to make that hereticall which they had made Orthodoxall. I confesse our great Councell sitting in two Houses raiseth many equivocations to disturbe the truth: wee must looks at the right constitution of them into a Councell, and so they must all come together, and their division topicall should not be tropicall, figurative fashioned to every fancy. Many having made the Court forsake it; and say, they are driven away by others, when the fault is their owne, and by the end they shew their action. Their end is to dissolve the Councell but they cannot by the Act of continuance, and I thinke the necessity of the Estate is such that any one order may supply the whole, by that rule in the Law illud quod ali is licitum non est, necessit is facil &illegible; et necessitas in &illegible; privilegion, quod jure privatur, In case of necessity by discretion, any part may doe that which the whole cannot doe. The King departs his Councell, and yet it remaines in being of all the Parts for without 3. Orders it is not constituted, and the Orders remaine virtually from the time of their actuall meeting and the Parliament being now no Equivocall body, but &illegible; and Estentiall, we must take it as it is and the Votes are vigorous in vertue, and Cæsar is there or no where to be obeyed, for hee can erect no other Tribunall in his Kingdome, neither can we appeale to any other, and so the fifth Section of Supply, is not fancied upon the Co-ordination, nor necessary Conservation of the Kingdome. From Names I come to Numbers and consider them in the Constitution or Co-alition as absolutely necessary for presence. Our Saviour having set his Apostles in the forme of Government, Mat. 28. 20. promiseth presence to the end of the World, and as long as the Church &illegible; it is not left void of power in the change of persons, and so the Parliament remaines in power, though many persons be absent, which are visible, and as they make a visible body must be present, but the three Members being powers are not seene but as abstracts in their concretes, which are not fancies, but virtues in the Councell. We looke not upon the bare bones, but invisible powers in them that worke as Co-ordinates, which supply and do not supplant one another, as the Persons &illegible; Our number is certaine, and it is either such at this present, or we have no Parliament and if the number be compleat, wee may say Cæsar wills what the Parliament does, and what the Parliament does not Cæsar cannot doe, or we appeale unto it, and the Nature of the thing answers the number, and so will they Orders, Offices, Actions and ends. The Orders have but one Office, one Trust, one Action, one End. His Majestie hath a Regall Office, but not righteous to withdraw it from his Parliament, and his trust is not, as he is made to say in his prayers of his Oath, which shewed his Office in Parliament most to be suspected, for his Lords and Commons that sweare to him, sweare not to the Kingdome, which trusts them without an Oath, as being impossible they should bee unfaithfull unto it, more then themselves; for they are more the Kingdome then the King. Kings seduced may wrong the common-wealth, but Parliaments cannot. His Majestie is made thus to speake of his Oath, That it cannot be meant that the King should thereby hee obliged to devest himselfe of his power to protect his Subjects, which is the great businesse of that Oath. Hee will not be bound up in Parliaments from his owne will, for he is made to say in another place, that hee is not bound to renounce his owne understanding, or contradict his owne conscience for any Counsellors sake whatsoever. It’s granted to a sole and competent judge so to doe, but His Majestie is neither in Parliament and though against the light of nature, and the evidence of fact no Man may contradict his owne Judgement, yet it is not his owne in both Houses, and Cæsar is then himselfe when he Judges with his two Houses, and not by himselfe, and &illegible; come to the Section.

Sect. 5. Of the Supply which is fansied upon the former Co-ordination.

THe King by the Doctors Confession acknowledgeth he can make no Laws without His two Houses, but they in their Supremacy will doe it without him, as if they were without him, as he is without them, doing his owne will, which is no Law, yet must be obeyed, and not resisted. It had beene happy the Dr. had seen the fifth Booke, which teacheth him that resistance is limited by law, and not the subversion of it, and if Cæsar will subvert himselfe, Cæsar may save himselfe, and the Dr. will never answer the 5th Book, that takes his words truly, that the subversun of Religion, Lawsand Liberties, may be resisted by arme and by Cesar if Cesar will not, for I equivocate with the Dr. out of no ill intention: Cesar in Paul’s sense is not the man, but the judgement seate, Act. 25. 10. and so Cesar may resist Cesar, and the Parliament the King, which is more then ever I said, or yet can thinke without Charitie that the Person is sacred, and to be redeemed with my life, and thousands more, but Religion, Lawes, Liberties, are worth more than a King, and better he than they perish, if no other Remedie be to be had, and the Doctor does ill to value his Majesty at such a rate, as rather to lose them, than his Soveraigne, no good charity, and I feare himselfe to be a man that had rather save his owne credit, then sacrifice it to his Nation, which seekes not the life of the King, but theirs that are Rebells to both, and if such Ordinances and Supplies be his sorrowes, I could wish him a better judgement.

The Militia is the Kings trust: and is it not the Parliaments? speake Doctor, and doubt not, and if it bee they supply his trust better then his Cavaliers. But the Dr. is very wise, and warme in his apprehension, for no sooner is the word out of his mouth, take notue that the King by Law is to call a Parliament, but the Eccho is, and by the way take notice he is the sole Iudge, and why then needs he call a Councell, when he may judge alone, indeed the Dr. adviseth him not to bee too hasty, I had thought he meant in his owne judgement, but it is the judgement of the Parliament he precipitates, and is sory they should seize on the Militia, and we are sory for the Commission of Array to be a knowne Law, as wee now know it, and that the Parliament may not judge it to be none against the Cavaliers. But the Parliament may not judge the Kings Intentions, and the imminent dangers have beene for the most part as invisible as they. Horrible imminent dangers, a jeere no jest, for in good earnest are the Kings intentious, as bad as the dangers, and have they broken out together? The Dr. hath done the King the wrong to breake his head, that no plaister will cure, for actions follow intentions, and the Parliament judged of them too truly, and time hath revealed, what now is hid to no body, though the Drs. braines conceive no such thing, feares follow, and the King had as much cause to feare as the Parliament. His Majesty withholds the Militia, for the same reasons the Parliament moved him to grant it, and both reasons of State, save the King must bee no part of it, and truely He is not out of Parliament, for wee have no other States but in &illegible; and yet this man will finde one out of it to be the whole, and so Cæsar is but not in his sense. We would same see the Law with the Dr. 25. H. 8 21. your Royall Majesty, and &illegible; Lords and Commont represent the whole Realme. VVell said Dr. and is not this Parliament so? say what you thinke, Casar is gone, and Casar cannot goe, whether will you follow. Your Booke comes from Oxford from Leonard Lichfield, but not from Cæsars Tribunall, will you have it judged there by both Houses? They will tell you they restraine not the State to them, further then they finde it to have no other Tribunall. Tell us where the State is else seated; shooting at Rovers may hit voted Enemies, and his Majesty were happy if he had none about Him. The Dr. findes but five or sixe sled over Sea, and returned as he sayes now in an Army. To posse by this, let us see what is materiall. And is this matter of no moment? But he addes, the time was not to provoke the Parliament powerfull with the People, which now are potent with the King. But whats the reason we are not in safety? He seemes to lay it on the Kings Army, and the good pleasure of God, that hath raised such an assistance unto him, that he is able to make resistance to the pretended Army of the Parliament. We may now judge of the Drs. determination for Cæsar to maintaine the quarrell against his owne Tribunall. Blowes are given, and Cæsar must beare them, but how, let all judge that reade the Resolution. Delinquents are in danger, and to deliver Friends from the Justice of Parliament, the King must pardon them. But the breach is made by Delinquents in Parliament, denyed the King to try them, what from his owne Tribunall? must not that consider how men may bee delivered up to Cæsar, from Court to Court? but the Campe makes a short tryall, and the Sword is a sharp Judge, and his Majesty will have the Militia at his owne pleasure, and that’s our woe. From pretences he comes to Reasons of co-ordination, and denies them by distinctions, not Dr. like, for the definition that is true may not be denyed, and supply is reciprocall with co-ordination, and to all purposes, both in respect of the end and meanes. Qui tollit medium, tollit quoque finem, co-ordinates have the same end, and may use the same meanes. There needs no expression, and the end will direct the meanes. The end is knowne to be safety, the King refuseth to worke for this end by such meanes as his Councell advise him, and will thinke of no other meanes but his owne will. The Militia is his, and he will use it without his two Houses. Let the Dr. answer, are the two Houses co-ordinate with the King? then they may supply the meanes of safety when he refuseth, and he refuseth against the contrivement, when being co-ordinate: he will subordinate them to his will. The Dr. doates about time, for it matters not when the constitution began so the condition be plain in the co-ordination as now it is, and to fetch about is foolish, and the fancy of him that formes it for others. But to the safety of the Kingdome in this supply, he addes the security of the co-ordinates one against another; and makes it a power of denying. Miserable man, such Denyalls are the death of the Kingdome. No question is made of the security of the parts, but the safety of the whole. Three Estates represent the whole Realme, and they are for it, and not it for them, and will the Dr. talke of the Kings security against the Kingdomes safety? Let them seeke that, and they will all be safe. The two Houses might secure themselves by forsaking their trust, as some doe by departing the Kingdome, others by departing the Parliament, but both destroy the whole and out of that their security is senselesse, as it is for the King to leave his Counsell for worse advise. The Dr. is a Dunce, pardon mee, I doe not thinke so, but in this owne thing, the two Houses are co-ordinate with the King ad consentiendum, not at all, for they are free in that to vote one against another, but they are co-ordinate to preserve the Kingdome, and in that they have no freedome. His objection is idle of Command, for they command not, but when He will not command, and he forceth them to doe that which truly he ought to doe, the Lawes by them being left in his hands, which when he rejects both Bills and Empire they are necessitated to execute without him. But this is further then Law will give them leave: Grant it, yet necessitie is their Law, and Supremacy their Arbitrary way. But what shall become of the Subjects property, if the King may not prevent the two Houses of an Ordinance to take all: Nay, I say what shall become of it, if the King and the Cavaliers may take all? no feare of the Parliament to be in fault this way, for no man will rob himselfe, and the two Houses represent the whole Realme, which the King out of them cannot doe, and as he is in his Campe rends the heart out of his owne body. But the Parliament makes the King &illegible; Stone in the foundation: would God he had never made himselfe so by removing his Person from his power, and born as much as in him lieth from his Parliament. But presence and absence is nothing, the vote is all, the King will not. Good Doctrine for a Doctour. I made too bold to call him a Dunce: but now I must say he is desperate. The King denies, and wee are undone. The two Houses must come home, or hold on, and like Nero see the Citie and State fired but with better affections, mourne and make it a Fast day, and pray, Lord have mercy upon us, whiles too many like those Rev. 11. 10. make merry. I know they are the Papists by their habitation, and witnesses they persecute. The Commons refuse the supply: Suppose it as impossible, we grant him his inference, and say the Dr. is in a vaine conceit further Commons (to use his owne word) is the substrata materia of the whole Kingdom, and if the King and Lords were without them, the whole Realme would represent nothing, and as they beare all there will need no question for their owne benefit, they will never forsake the Kingdome, and if it come to a &illegible; to be formelesse and voyde of Inhabitants, if Colonies come into it, the propagation will be as of old without Kings save since Tyrants thrived the people never prospered. We must examine the shift that shakes off conscience, which as it saves not the one from guilt, so neither will it the other from violence, and if the King die can He be at Westminster? worthy Sir, you should have done well prosessing to resolve conscience, which I can free from guilt where you say it, by our Logick wherein your Learning cannot forget the distinction of Causes, whereof one is this, causa per se, he kills the King that intends it, causa per accident, hee kills him not, where the efficients Scope is to doe no such things. Hee that puts the King into a desperate way, & delivers him not out of it, is the cause of his death, whosoever kills him. And therefore looke you to it as a Doctour, and doe your duty, the Parliament does, and so doe all good people, and who can help him they cannot hinder, Religion, Lawes, Liberties are dearer then all mens lives, or else they were mad men that venture to die for nothing. I could tell you something of these Warres, Rev. 7. 7. and beware you of the Beast, especially with two hornes, he may be a Lambe by his hornes, but his mouth is black and soule, and many are filled with such speaking. I hope you use the Keyes better, and the King might save some of your doctrine better delivered, and Divinitie taught him to doe him more good than the Universities have done of late, whose Learning to lift up Monarchy and Episcopacy may cast downe both.

The Conclusion of this Section is sick of the Staggers, it reeles too and fro, and from voted ones to begin the violence, brings in thousands to maintaine it, honourably he sayes, such as holy Wars were to destroy Kings and Kingdomes to raise the Pope, and being now up, some must defend him, and he deludes Kings, and good ones too, have taken parts with the ungodly, and the union of Beast and his Image, Beast and false Prophet is not without a mystery, as plain as the Drs. rules are for conscience, which he intricates in contrivements, and by Cesars Person overthrowes his power, not placing it in the Parliament, but against the two Houses as a third Estate, when he is either in the one of them, or no where as he ought. But to shew him the businesse of bloud, let him call to minde where the last persecution of the ten ended, and where the Street ends, Rev. 11. 8. It is but one, and that a long ones and England ends it, and so did it the ten persecutions, and raised up the first meanes of deliverance. Æra Martyrum, and Æra Disclesiana are one in History and the Altar is as much, Rev. 6. 9. and the red Dragon ends with the Earth-quake, v. 12. and the Beast followes, and hath an Image, that followes him as a shadow does the body, and this Beast is the false Prophet, and he brings in another Beast deceived by him, and the Keyes does it, and Crownes are lead by them, and make Warre for him they understand not. Plainely our case is that of &illegible; 2 Chron. 19. 2. the King wants but a Seer, the Dr. might doe well to open this Text, and shew him who the ungodly are. Idolaters, Haters of God, they that Worship him with Baal and Balaam, Rev. 2. 14. is the Pope, Antipas his enemy: Balac seduced Kings, and good ones may be in affinity with them, 2 Chron. 18. 1. and should they help the ungodly Papists: say not they are pious, their devotion is worse then Israels, should they love them that hate God, They hate him that know him, as Ahab did, yet halted and halvod in his Service.

The Parliament is bent to Reforme, and reduce the Nation from Romane Superstitions, and that stirres up a popish faction against them and it is but turning the phrase, should the Noble and honest thousands with the King be helped by the ungodly, and love them better then both Houses that hate Gods true Religion? But the Dr. sates the King is not carried away by the perswosion or enemies to himselfe, or Kingdome; he is forced to this just and necessary defence, and by his Army is more safe then in his two &illegible; and by the Doctors owne words, I object two things to satisfie Conscience. First let him shew one Text of Scripture that allowes assrnity with Idolaters and to help them, or be helped by them to love the haters of God, or desire to bee loved by them. Secondly, let him declare his last words to bee true, that the King is safer every way by his owne Army, then that which pretends to preserve him in his politique. I must tell him, and I am sure of it, that his Royall or Regall power is unrighteous against his politiques and having raised an Army be that against his other just right, he hath no remedy of Law to free it from Rebellion, and if they will follow the advise of him that ended our Civill warres, and peaceably hath derived unto him the Crowne, which he received from Richard the third an usurper, and to take away all dubious termes from all followers of the Kings in their Warres, he procured their security by Parliament, not by his owne power, and if the policy of Parliament will not protect them, the pretended Doctrine of this Dr. may endanger all he perswades to cleave to the King in his wars upon his own words.

Sect. 6. Of the finall Resolution of this States Iudgment, and power of declaring Law.

THe Dr. is almost out of breath, and we have runne him past resolution, and a meane Reader may wind him out of all, but we shall give him wind at will, if he can gaine ought by his end or finall sate in the two Houses to which Henry the seventh repaired for safety of all his Subjects, the Civill Warre ended, and so must King Charles, or we shall never end our controversie. In this Section the Dr. is at his share, and saies it is not enough for finall resolution, except the King be a Cypher, and the Houses have all. This whole stickes upon his stomack, and he would faine divine, and give the King a part, and good reason. But he meanes all, at least in the Militia, and it is most true out of Bracton, ea quæ sunt lustitiæ, &c. ea quæ pacis sunt, &c. ea quæ Belli sunt, &c. All ordinary Jurisdiction belongs to the King, and cannot bee severed from his Crowne, for that makes it, nec potest a privata persona possiders, no private person possesseth any jurisdiction, and every Subject is a private person: but so are not the 3 Estates, and yet they are all compounded of naturall men, and may be immortall in Mortalls, and the King dies no more then any other order, as in the, 7. Rep. 12. a. Calvins c. the King is a Body Politique, lest there should be inter-regnum; for that a Body Politique never dieth. The King therefore is no Cypher, but the whole summe, set him right in his place. In ordinary Jurisdiction none but he, and to him all are sworne to execute his legall will, or to obey it: But Parliaments are not sworn to the King, but the King to them, and the Dr. teacheth him perjury thorough his whole Booke, and because hee is a Cipher as he sets him, he shares nothing with the two Houses if he refuse them, and he is but a Cipher to all his Army, and his Houses warre against it for rebellion, for by ordinary jurisdiction they are not his Judges, and as many as they kill they are by Law Murtherers, and by the 3. Estates Rebells to the whole Kingdome, and if the King will not follow them, both Houses may. The Dr. may ease himselfe of his earnest Argument with his Answerer, and his first constitution, for what hath Conscience to doe with more then to obey for the present. Conquests take not away the force of resistance, but States may resist, and so the powers in the Senate resisted Nero, but the Apostle did not, but appealed to him. Act. 25. 11. and God delivered him from the mouth of the I. &illegible; 2 Tim. 4. 17. Momenta temporum is well observed, and I have told him of one now, let him beware providence plague not him for an Enemy to the will of God, when he raiseth his Witnesses with the ruine of Rome, when the Almighty hath Translated the Crown seven times, and the Popes that hold it shall not long enjoy it, and happy Princes and Priests that pull downe that principalitie and priesthood. Concessiones, we have granted. What then? Jurisdiction is the Kings, and it beseemes him to grant, and by oath he is bound unto it, and if of Grace be grant more, let it adde to his praise, which the Dr. will soon wipe out, if he write as he does. Passions punish the Dr. exceedingly, for he begins his Booke with servent rash anger, and followes his Argument with the lesse wit, by his stubborne will never yeelding to reason: The King hath his Crowne by succession, therefore not by election: I dare say by the Coronation oath election began that succession, and the consent asked, sheweth the King had his Crowne by the election of him and his heires, and if the line be out the right returnes to them, for the Kings Heires receive in trust, and not heires in property, to dispose of what they have as they list. But the King claimes from a Conquerour, and yet hath not a free Title, but limited by Law, and who made it, if the people might choose it? He suspects the Parliament will depose the King, but he may be suspected more justly to teach the King to depose them, and dispose of all they have by conquest, if the Parliament doe not stand unto them. He puts the case of division, and gives it a bad determination, first, by reproach, that the Parliament watcheth opportunities to prevaile by faction; secondly, to command the Militia without the King: which concoction of coleworts is so stale that we will stand no longer upon this Section, but see another to surfeit us.

Sect. 7. The finall Resolution is not arbitrary in the two Houses, but onely in the three Estates.

I Might take just exception, that the two Houses and the three Estates are not divided, but we will patiently heare him out. Saint Augustine answeres for the beginning of Arbitrary Government, when he defines a people to bee a company of men associated by the consent of Law, and communion of profit: was it not in this society to consent? and did they consent without their wills, and had the wills against their owne good. It’s true Rome consented to an Emperour, as we may see in Augustus, who hide his ambition when hee denied what hee desired; and Tiberius was jeered for his request, and the Senate reserved the supreme power still, as is plaine in the reigne of Tiberius: And because the Doctor may doubt of it out of Dio, saying Augustus was absolved from all Lawes, I shall satisfie him out of Rusebius Eccl. hist. lib. 2. cap. 2. Vetus decretum est, ne Deus ab Imperatore consecraretur, nisi à Senata probaretur: The Emperour was an high Priest, and might neither by his priesthood nor Principality doe any thing the Senate allowed him not to doe. And Tertul. in Apolog. takes notice of this before Easebibtus related it, Niss homini Deus platuerit, Deus non erit, home jam Deo propitius esse debebit. I hope the Doctor will not say of our King, that he is solutus legibus: that the three Estates stand for the subject of supremacy, in extraordinary jurisdiction I beleeve it, that our State should be popular, and our king no more then the Duke of Venice I conceive it not, neither in ordinary nor extraordinary jurisdiction, for in the one the king is the sole person, and all powers come from him, and neither Lord nor Levite, person or Potentate may exercise a jurisdiction without him: In the other he is the first in honour, and they all together (as our bookes say) are a Court of thrice great honour and justice, of which, none ought to imagine a dishonourable thing, 9. Rep. 106. b. 107. a. 6. Rep. 27. b. 28. pl. com. fo. 398. Fortesc. cap. 18. A Court that can doe no wrong, the proper Judges of doubts, dangers, injuries: and for the Commons, the writ directs the people to the &illegible; and most discreet men, and one sayes they exceed the Romane Senate in number, and are like them for sage and judicious men.

The Dr. &illegible; them all with dirt not content to make the King supreme in ordinary juridiction: but in all to give him predominancy, and in warre to &illegible; all to his will, and out of all Courts to doe as he pleaseth without residence, when the law is, Extra Territorian &illegible; dicenti, non paretur impure, he that obeyes the command of any power, out of its jurisdiction, shall be punished &illegible; &illegible; what &illegible; saies this Dr. to the Kings Cavaliets, in what jurisdiction does the King command them? sure I am they are punishable by the three Estates for Tyranny. The King will not consent to their punishment, and the Doctor sayes they must be spared, though they spoile the whole Kingdome. &illegible; &illegible; Doctor, such pitty spoiles the City: His boldnesse who can beare it, that speakes of an unanimous consent so grosly, as not to follow the &illegible; part present, but stay till it may be tried by all, or such a number as will come at their leisure, and then lash out at them that watch for opportunities, which argues duty not danger, though he expound it in an other sense to please the King, and sway him to aside: and surely it would not have lost it, if the vigilant Houses had not prevented their plots. Dictates of two Houses are great &illegible; but the last Dictate must be left to the King, and nothing done without it: This he makes the consequent of his owne understanding; and must it be the judgement of the whole Kingdome? It may be sufficient for his owne conscience, but it bindes no mans else; and yet if both houses judge the judgement is not private, but legall in our obedience, and inevitable. I am weary of this Section, not for want of answeres, but their multitude so often repeated, which a few lines might have satisfied the subject, if the subject of supremacie in the three Estates were not contradicted by him by shifting, and if the King would have shared with his two houses in the Militia the matter had beene ended peaceably for the Parliament, never required more then to proceed with the King; but if he refuse them, and resolve as the Doctor does, we are resolved where the right is for the supply, and conscience convinced the Divine is in an &illegible;

Sect. 8. A confutation of what is replyed by other Answerers upon the first Section of the former Treatise.

THe Doctor deales with many Divines, and all of them have diversity of Divinity and he contradicts them all, not like an asse by negation, but affirmatively as a wise man knowing what he hath to say to every man, bee it &illegible; of &illegible; conscience must be resolved by him. To the fuller Answer we have had his determination, and now he is upon the backe of Master Bridge, and &illegible; passeth over him without drowning; and as with the former distinction of Co-ordination and Sub-ordination he got over the water, so he now wades over the shallow Ford of preservation and jurisdiction, and douseth Conscience in both over head and eares without understanding. The Author saies well in all his Propositions, and the Dr deales with them as the King does with Delinquents, lets them alone, and onely saies to the first, a legall Tryall is just and necessary, so it be in a legall way in the highest Court with the Kings consent, but to do it with an Army is an Argument the Militia is not the Kings as an Act of selfe preservation, but an act of Jurisdiction over the King, as if to punish Delinquents were against the Jurisdiction of the King. But how is it Legall? I Answer, by a Court of Justice, wherein is extraordinary Jurisdiction to punish those that the King by his ordinary jurisdiction will not punish, and though he have not done the wrong, yet his ordinary Justices have done it, and now being brought to his extraordinary Judges he himselfe must hinder them against the preservation of the Kingdome, the trust whereof is in the Parliament, and the right in the People, who cannot doe it disorderly, as long as they are directed unto it by so great a Court.

But a great Delinquent was kept by that from Tryall at the instance of the King, and good Reason; for they that may reverse the judgement of ordinary jurisdiction, may judge extraordinarily of the matter of Hull, where the great Delinquent seized the Militia without violence to the King, begging his grace to remit such a space of time, as the Parliament might judge of his fact, and then his firme saith should appeare to his Liege Lord, as a Liege Subject; that is legall, and if the Parliament may not declare that, then the Royall power may hang and draw whom it pleaseth, and it shall be righteous. For invasion of enemies, and the insurrection of Papists, the worst of enemies, the worthy Dr. puts it to conscience to say, have the Subjects cause to seare? And I say he hath no Conscience nor compassion of Ireland, and England that will not say it, arme and resist, and he will never answer the fifth Booke, that affirmes it, for Religion, Lawes and Liberties, all men are bound to resist, and damnation is not for that, but resistance by Armes, and Arguments against Rulers that are for the praise of the good, and punishment of the wicked, and to say the powers are from God that doe otherwise is without Text: and when God speakes of Tyrants, as his servants, it is for such service as is said by the Apostle, and so Cyrus was for the praise of the Iewes, and the punishment of the Caldeans, and though Religion teach not Rebellion; yet Lawes and Liberties, where they are teach men to defend them, and Paul by Cæsar resisted Cæsar. He would not be tryed by his Deputies, but his owne Tribunall, and a freeman, like Paul, Act. 22. 28. may check wrong in Officers, and challenge his freedome, and defend it to the utmost power of Cæsar, which is not in his person, but seat of Judgement. The Co-ordinatour contradicts not Mr. Bridge, as the Dr. brags, for selfe preservation is in the Subject by the Law of nature, which no positive Law can infringe which puts trust in the Parliament, as well as the King, and neither is against the welfare of a community, and that having the Jurisdiction of the Parliament is strengthened by it. The Dr. is driven out of his wits, and wants Hellebore to help him by a strong purgation. Positive Laws restraine not the Law of nature, neither does trust destroy selfe preservation. Whither will the Dr. run to recover his wits but to repentance, and God grant him pardon, and open his eyes to see his errors. Pretences of selfe preservation may be seditious. What then? Men may drink till they be drunke; therefore starve nature to prevent the abuse. Wildly hath Mr. Bridge wandered, to 1 Chron. 12. 19. and I will not weigh it with him, yet David was no Hypocrite, and his helpers in warre is something more then a wild note, Rom. 13. 1. It’s well assumed for the Parliament, and subjection is due, but how must it be done? If the King will carry with them, and keepe them company. But he divides them, and sayes they declare Law without him, and supposeth the Dr. not to doubt of it; and he sayes to satisfic, they judge the fundamentalls that may build upon them. He addes new Lawes, and then is sure the Parliament is silent if the King will say nothing, and except he say it, we may not obey them, and so all is at an end, be the evills never so many. We are bidden heare and feare, and doe no more presumptuously, Deut. 17. 13. Its meant of the great judgment of many when there was no King. But Moses made it good, and was there no time when Moses was not, or any single judge, and yet the Elders were to be heard, and Israel was happy while it had them, serving the Lord, Iudg. 2. 7. Hard hap to light on Saul, David, and Solomon, who had their power from GOD, and not from the people. We answer from both. But how doe the people give that which they have not? I hope the Dr. knowes the people are said to make their Kings, as the wife makes her Husband. The Dr. must goe to schoole to learne the Argument of Relation, where Relatives are mutuall causes and effects, and the people make a King when they consent unto him, and God never gave them any to make them their owne by Conquest, being free borne people, otherwise might and money make slaves, and he that sells himselfe to the King, let him naile him to his doore, or if he will not yeild for money, let Prince Rupert tie him with Ropes, and carry him in triumph to the King, and such Subjects we must be if the Dr. may determine. An excellent Collection, 1 Chron. 13. 1. 2. for the Euller Answer to fall upon the Collector, and though he will say with neither, yet this he will say, David meerely designed his owne Deputies, and the people did nothing. What then is meant by the Congregation of Israel, if Israel had no power? Did not the Elders come for all, 2 Sam. 5. 3. and made the League? Voluntiers and listed Souldiers, are a sport to the Dr. and lie spares not the Parliament in sending them, and by Sheriffes of Shires sheweth that the King and not the Parliament maketh them. We know Constables of Townes, called petty Officers made by the People, and chiefe Constables made by the hundreds and I may adde Sheriffes by their Counties and Corporations, and for ought I know Sergeants at Armes are at the command of the Parliament, and they may use them all to execute their decrees; and raise Armies too for ought the Dr. hath said, and I see he is not well seen in the Iewes Synedrion, that all the Kings had no power to make Warre, but such as is permitted by them or expresly commanded by God, as with the seven Nations, Amaleck, &c. He hath by the Co-ordinatour been driven to confesse a Supremacy in three Estates, and I am sure a Supremacy may doe any thing for the good of all that are under them, and have an Arbitrary, necessary, and happy way to supply all wants. Arbitrary in Votes, necessary in Supplyes, happy in Consent: which last clause if it cannot be had by the Votes of all, necessity makes Supply, and so both Houses in the Arbitrary Supremacy may use the Militia, or else it belongs not to their Supremacy, and who hath a greater. The King may have it granted him in ordinary jurisdiction, and no private person; that is, no Subject at all may use it: but in that high, and extraordinary jurisdiction, the States of the Kingdome may doe as Mr. Bridge said in his three grounds more foundly then the Dr. hath done in contradicting it. His lamentation of sorrowful parents followes upon such arguments as he makes, and Armes had never bin taken up, if such Doctors had not dazled mens eyes, with the maze of Rebellion, that none can cleere but the two Houses dishonoured by him, as in the next Objection. If the power of the Prince be from the people, they may take it away when they will, and depose him, when he abuseth it. He saies the deniall of this is cold, and the point paves a way into it, and preachers seditiously set it on to the prejudice of the Prince, to consent to all the Parliament pleaseth, All that understand any thing, may know the Dr. finds fault with himself, for that he layes upon others, for godly preachers settle the Supremacy where it is both for powers and person, and he by the person would pull downe the powers, when as they hold up one another, so should all that love them rightly maintaine them together, and not pull them a pieces by Court preaching, where the King heares nothing but of his owne power, and the advancement of it. The Homilies we honour more then the Bishops have done, who in th point of Idolatry have made strange constructions of them. They are right downe that Images cannot be in Churches without perill of Idolatry, and how have late have they been placed in Churches, and Cheapside Crosse which the Parliament pulling downe, doubtlesse will have the Doctors determination against it, but we are glad he urgeth the Homilies, and we shall Answer them better then the Bishops have done, and confesse it is not lawfull for Subjects to take up Armes, but may not the Parliament? No, if they be Subjects But how are the three Estates Subjects? Not as powers, and for persons, as farre as the Supremacy is over them, let them all obey, and let the personall Act of the King be cleared rom the breach of his owne Supremacy. A finall Judgement Negative and not conclusive is &illegible; for a finall judgement concludeth whether given affirmatively or negatively, and it is binding in a Magistrate; and his Majestie makes it so in his greatest Court denying them to doe any thing without him, and commanding all to obey him, upon his high displeasure, and punisheth it with that rigor, as never were any Lawes, before his Edicts, omnes ordines consentientes is not in their generall Votes, as if all persons were to consent, but that the three powers doe it, and the Kings consent to a Court is enough to proceed, though it be not to every act, for many are just by refusall; as for example, the act of continuance hath an end of action, and to continue a Court to doe nothing is idle. The King opens a way of Justice, the Judges are set, the people attend, and must waite till the word come from the King, heare this man, hang that, handle such a Cause, bee carefull to say nothing in another; see ye serve my will and not the Law; Let Sir Iohn Hotham suffer; and set at liberty my followers. An Arbitrary Court indeed that must doe nothing but what the Head will, and shall the body be against it? I would same the Doctour would informe mee what Head is meant, 1 Cor. 12. &illegible; Not Christ, for be needs no Members to supply his wants. A visible Head it must be in a visible body. Surely, we have found the Pope, and the Fathers of that body, say, Kings are the Feet; we will not make him so low, and yet they that love him best, if they be the Papists, will place him no higher; for if he will not goe for them, they will make him as low as the body they have put under him, his despised Parliament, no better then Feet, that must blindly be lead by no other light than the Dr. allowes them: but the Apostle will &illegible; us by the Text applyed, v. 28. who are first in this body, and if first, Heads, and of them Peter might be the first in Order, and will that satisfie the King in the Supremacy of many; for so it was in the Apostles, and so must it be in the three Estates, they are but one Head of the Kingdome, for it is true as the Person is but one, so the Powers are three, and to place them under one person is the Doctours errour, and makes good those words, Rex est universis minor, and if hee mind the words, 25. H. 8. 21. will prove it, the whole Realme being represented in the Parliament, his Majesty being one of the Members, and therefore lesse then the whole, and the whle Kingdome cannot be severd from the Parliament, and they are strange men that will not be in it operative to defend it, but like the Dr. dally with words of head and body in opposition, as body against Head, and part against part: when he knowes not what Head means and if they be first in the Church that rule it, and heads in the Apostles sense, I may say as much of the Members that they make one Supremacy, and the Doctor strives as the Papists doe, nothing can be done without the Pope, and so he, nothing without the King, and if Paul and Peter had so striven, Gal. 2. 11. what had become of the Faith of the Church.

Peter was blame-worthy for his errour, but not his supremacy, which hee yeelded to his fellow Apostle for the preservation of the truth; and so would it be here, if Divines did not delude his Majesty with maintenance of sole supremacy of power to yeeld the Parliament no part of it. His conclusion of this Section is false, for the Senate and People were not enslaved as the Christians were, but resisted, and so did Christians, Tyrants, when they had power; as with Constantine and Theodosius: and Saint Peter calls not the Emperour supreme, as a Tyrant but a King, which Bracton sayes is to be obeyed, and not a Tyrant; and the fifth booke hath invincibly proved it against him, and the worst that he can say against it, the point is dangerous to deliver Armes into the hands of the people; and is it not as dangerous for a Tyrant to take them out of their hands, and use them as the &illegible; did, 1 Sam. 13. 19. Obedience is due to a King, and not to a Tyrant, for if a Tyrant be no King, no Scripture bids me obey him, and if the supremacy of the three Estates bids mee arme, and the King himselfe say, that legally is placed in both Houses, more then a sufficient power to &illegible; and restraine the power of Tyranny, and when it is bent to destroy Religion, Lawes, Liberties, there will be reason enough for the resolution of Conscience, except wee make conscience to obey men more then God.

Sect. 9. Of Scriptures for resistance refuted, and regaine by good reason of the Peoples right reserved.

I shall begin strangely with the Doctor, from the maine institution of Kings in the office of Rule, Iudgement, and Warre. Wee will have a King over us, and who commanded it? They refused to be commanded, and followed their owne will by the worst rule, We will be like the Nations planted by God, Deut. 32. 8. but was he pleased to place Kings over them? did they not make their owne choice, and submit to be judged by them, and use them as their Generalls in their warres? we are informed by our Lawes, that such was our contrivement at the first: and Bodin in his Common-wealth l. 1. c. 10. p. 162. 163. 164. l. 3. c. 1. confirmes us by many examples of the power of the people in making their great and grand Commanders, and especially the Romane State, both under their Kings and Emperours, the chiefe power of denouncing war, and concluding peace, rested in the People and Senate, and our Statutes and Stories tell us as much of our kingdome. Cato &illegible; in the Senate said of Cæsar, that he should be called out of France, because hee made warre upon that Nation without the command of the Senate and People, and propounded for his punishment so presuming, that he should be delivered to the enemy: and the Doctor cannot be ignorant that our Parliaments have done the same; and for resistance read Neh. 4. 2. The Army in Samaria was ready to ruine the Religion of Ierusalem, and the care of Nehemiah to sence the City with walls to secure Gods worship, and he made ready with Armes to resist them. Ionathan &illegible; rescued, and the Doctor will have it done by prayers and teares; but I am sure they sware it and Said durst not execute his oath. Davids defence was with Armes, and the Doctor dallies that nothing was done, and yet David disarmes the King, though he attempted not his death; and hee playes further with his wit. the example was extra-ordinary, and yet neither Scripture, nor any circumstance to say it. Ebad killed the Tyrant as a Judge, and that sheweth his calling. The Parliament petitioned for a Guard, therefore they could not raise it when the King refused: How proves he that? we may not credit all he saves in the Chaire of his owne infallibility. Desperate shifts to make simulation Scripture, 1 Chron. 12. 19. 1 Sam. 29. 8. and grounds of conscience. Either David had no conscience, or he meant to sight against his Lords Enemies, and would have done it if the King would have permitted it, and divine providence have suffered it. His madnesse was a sinne of infirmity; his inrode upon the South was true, and Achish askes no more. Vzziah is resisted by home reproofe, and forced too to forsake the Temple. Moses appointed the Trumpets to be made, and the Priests to blow them with whole and broken sounds: The Alarme was to warre and weeping, the whole found was to peace and rest; and it were well the Doctor would so sound his Trumpet in Gods name, and resist the King, till he as Moses blesse his people, with Returne O Lord to the many thousands of England, and that the Arke of God might so march before him, that God might arise and scatter his enemies the Papists. Numb. 10. 35, 36. and that hee would remember the promised cloud of protection, vers. 34. Rev. 11, 12. &illegible; commanded resistance, and to hold fast the Messenger of his Masters mischiefe. The remedy of crying will not be heard for them that will not heare God, but such as pray Lord helpe them, may helpe themselves, when no Law is against them, and the Doctor cannot shew that a Tyrant may not bee resisted. The Doctor denies not a man to shut his owne doores for his security; and may not a City shut their gates to save themselves? David no doubt would have done it, if the men of Keilah would not have contradicted it. Let him looke from common wayes and wells, to walled Cities, and see if oppida bee not ab opponendo, or opibus, when theeves would breake in and steale. The Apostles prohibition of resistence is without limitation: His fifth Answerer will tell him, nay, and the Text limits it on all sides, or he hath lost his senses. The Doctour concludes this Section with enough, and I say more than enough for the loosenesse of his discourse, and I am sorry I have been so long.

Sect. 10. A Confutation of what is replyed upon the third Section of the former Treatise.

I have nothing to say to this Section, but the sense of words. All men know the common use of puting the abstract for the concrete, powers for Potentates. That Monarchs were mens inventions, appeares by the Nations that had Kings before Gods people, and are equally mans invention with other formes of Government, and we are ill guided by the Dr. to derive Monarchy from God immediately, because supreme and next him immediately, then from him to them that are sent by him, which were something, if all Governours were from Kings, but where Kings are not, from whom are they then? from the People, and then they from God to set them up, and that’s the truth, a People are first Gods, and then by them and their consent he placeth his Ministers amongst them, and so hee dealt with his owne people, first choose them for his Church, and then gave them Kings, and the first words in the Kings oath are, servabis Ecclesiæ Dei, cleroque & populo pacem ex integro, & concordiam in Deo secundum vives tuas. If it had not been for the Church, God would never have cared for Kings, and therefore this care should bee chiefest for that, and so it is for a part of it, ill deserving at this time I meane the Clergy, and of them the Bishops, which I condemne of two horrible crimes in the Kings Oath detraction and addition. They have stolne out of the Oath the principle verb, for the peoples and Parliaments Election of Lawes, and have put in another Verbe, the Lawes and customes which they have not a word of Election. The addition is a long admonition to pardon and protect the Bishops, which the King must repeate word for word, which he does in no other part of the oath, and this in it had never being till King Iames took it, and his Majesties words are worth the penning? The Parliament hath not deals faithfully in the making use of a Latine Record, when it might as well have sit forth the forme of the Kings Oath in English, even of that very Oath which he took at his Coronation, which is said to be found in the Records of the Exchequor. They were ashamed to say in the Memorialls &illegible; Lambeth, for there it is, and I thinke no where else, and in all probability the Bishops did it, for the Regall & Episcopall Monarchies. King Iames made an end of the Militia by Parliament, by a repeale in the 21-year of his reign, and ever after used it in his owne person, and the people cryed out of the oppression, and now roare under a Commissions of Array to hinder the Parliament of their wonted Militia, yea, and of all their Lawes, for if the two Houses had not looked into the true Copies of the Kings Oath, they had been defeated of their power to elect Lawes, and the Bishops by another framed Oath, called the abominable &c. had made sure not onely of the Kings pardon and protection, but the oppression and Tyranny of their Monarchy. God open the Kings eyes to see with better eyes then such blind Doctours, as have deluded him.

Sect. 11. A Confutation of what is replyed upon the fourth Section in the former Treatise.

I shall soone discharge this Section. The Dr. sayes none of his Adversaries have bitten at the edge of his answer of Government began in Armes. We shall not bite at it, but burst it in pieces, a King 18. 7. The Lord was with Hezekiah, and he prospered whether soever he went forth; and be rebelled against the King of Assyria, and served him not. His Father began the Service, and his Sonne served after him, and payed tribute, the signe of a Conquest, what say you, was not Senacherib the Conquerour, and consent given to serve him, and yet Hezekiah served him not, and it is called Rebellion, and prospered of God. Put the case the King holds us by Conquest, and I will conclude wee may rebell, and that is resistance, and deposition of Him that will without consent rule over a People. That the King cannot forfeit his power to the Kingdome, you say it is shame makes us say so, and will it not be a shame to you, if you cannot prove it. I know his Crown is a personall Right, and so it is neither grantable, nor forfeitable to any Person, but take heed of the Kingdome, for good Drs. say, the Kingdome in Parliament may doe any thing, and I shall tell you my opinion, that the Office of the King may be forfeited three wayes. First, by ablatton for violence, and so I thinke the Kingdomes needs not take away the Crowne. Secondly, by Amission, when he looseth his right in Law, and that I dislike too, because the third way is the surest, and does no wrong Thirdly, by transmission, which is done three wayes. First, by consent, and his Majesty should remember he hath forfeited that to both Houses, and they may use it for him seeing he will not. Secondly, by omission, default, or defect, when he will not use his trust. Thirdly, by Commission, soule fact, or an evill Act, as a misuser of his trust, and so by transmission the two Houses may doe without him, what he should doe with them. I will say no more to this Section, and suddenly set my Reader out of the Stocks, to stand rectus in Curia for conscience.

The two last Sect. with all the rest, are Riddles to the Reader in five things.
Mendacia non dio fallant. { 1. Monarchy is not absolute. } Mendacem oportet esse memorem.
{ 2. Monarchy is not of the people. }
{ 3. Monarchy is onely from God. }
{ 4. Monarchy is the first power. }
{ 5. All humane powers are from it. }

THe &illegible; answer angers the Dr. and he argues strangely against him for absolute Monarchy in a &illegible; Dynastie in the Church and so it hath bin from Adam to this day, in families, in a Nation, in all Nations. In Families, the ten Patriarkes before the Flood were such Monarchs as used to God guide his Church, Heb. 1. 1. and they were the Prophets to all families against Cain, and the &illegible; Gen. 6, 1, 2. Mens daughters and Gods sonnes couple together in spirituall corruption. After the Flood ten Patriarkes more to Moses propagate true Religion and yet cursed &illegible; corrupts them and Abraham is drawn from Idolaters, and with much adoe &illegible; himselfe from Idols. All these taught the truth by Tradition, or divine revelation as God spake unto them by infallible dreames and Visions, and Abraham is supposed to have the first Vision of God and of Jesus Christ. Moses was the man God spake unto, as he had never done to any Man before him, and he governed a Nation, and was the first that ever brought Truth into writing, and now the Booke of God becomes the Peoples direction, and from Moses to Saul is the time of the Judges, Act 13. 20. Note that God, and not Man gave them. After the Iudges the people desired a King, ver. 21. and God gave them Saul who with Samuel Reigned Divinely but that was but two yeares all the rest he lived a Tyrant, and was not of God, who removed him, and made David his faithfull Servant a Man after his own heart, and the patterne for all Princes. &illegible; succeded him and excelled all Princes, and in the end turned Tyrant by Idolatry. God ends giving with David, and leaves all to succession, &illegible; David passeth by his eldest Sonne, and sets up &illegible; to succeed him and there ends Monarchy as a &illegible; or &illegible; dynastie, and now begans distraction, and &illegible; rends ten parts from &illegible; and in Israel was never a good King that departed from his Tyranny, especially in Idolatry, and few were good in Iudah. The Dr. may now see his error in the &illegible; &illegible; that divine Monarchy was absolute from the Creation; as for humane Monarchies they were of men, as their Lawes were, and the people reformed their right; and rebelled one against another, and made no bones to kill Tyrants and good Kings smarted sometimes by such outrages, and David was kept from Saul because he was so anointed of God, as was &illegible; any King after David, and therefore next to him is Christ in the Apostles Narration, and of his seed came Christ, when the people of Rome had made Herod the Tetrarch of Galilce the King of the Jews, and the Dr. may learne how the World was ruled at this time after the &illegible; of the people and Senate of Rome. Antons begged of them the honour for Herod to end the Civill Warre, and game peace, which Christ the King of peace brought them; though they understood it not, for the Evangelists take notice of the time, and persons ruling, that the divine Ruler might be knowne for the Monarch to his Church, Luk. 2. 1, 2. and 3. 1, 2. The Emperour, the King the Ethnarch, President, Tetrarch, Toparch, are the six severall formes, the Majestie of the people of Rome, used to set forth their glory, and the Dr. might learne that the Fuller Answer was right in his absolute Monarchy meaning it of a Thearchy, whereof God is the sole Author, and such is not the Monarchy of King Charles, nor yet by conquest, but compact with his people, and if he will not so hold it by good doctrine, the Dr. will undoe him, for if he fly to his Sword, he will lose his Kingdomes, if to divinity he will deceive himselfe in his Title, hee had best hold himselfe to his Parliament and people, and reject the Dr. and his complices.

Monarchy is not of the people. In this he contradicts his other Answerers that say it is, and so does he: for if it be not absolutely of God, but as all humane powers are, Peter must be expounded to meane by humane Creation, that worldly policies are Mens creatures, and the formes of Government have bin found out by them, and all of them save divine orders direct us to the Politicians and people of this World, and because his last Section is of Bishops as the best; nay, with an Emphasis, simply best, and if so best be with the King, for none but he makes them, and if the people may doe as much for them, as they may for Kings, then the Parliament may consider of them for the people, and if they bee not jure divine they are gone, and they deserve it as having done all the mischiefe to his Majestie. Episcopacy asserted, I like it well, he wades a rationall way; and I would bolt out something for the Bishops, beginning at Deacons, for of them the Apostles made the first Bishops, as being their Ministers in three things, as they were of Christ. First, to Baptize those they converted, Ioh. 4. 2; Secondly, distribute the money they received, Ioh, 4. 8. and 13. 29. 1 Cor. 1. 17. Thirdly, to preach, when and where they pleased, Luk. 9. 2 & 10. 1. The Apostles and seventy were Disciples to Christ and the Apostles were provided of Deacons to minister under them, and the first were Hebrewes, the second Hellenists &illegible; Jewes. The Hebrewes displeased the Hellenists, Act, 61. The Reason why the Apostles used the Hebrewes was because they were the Richer, and the Church received most from them and by them the Apostles disposed of their treasures being trusted with a greater worke to preach the Gospell, and Paid sayes of that as all the Apostles did that the Ministration of Baptisine and money might be by others, and the Deacons did both, and in the dispersion were disposed of by the Apostles to goe before them, or with them to that worke. The word Deacon is not in the Text, we have that by tradition, that these were Deacons. Marke is made the Minister of Paid and &illegible; Afterwards Paid take &illegible; Titus, Timethy, &illegible; Clemens, &c. and our Ancients call these Deacons, and of them were made Bishops, as the gravest, and greatly experienced persons in Church policy, and might well be called the Angels of the Churches, and their order is divinely expressed, Rev. 4. 4. called a Presbytery, 1 Tim. 4. 14. and by Cornelius and Cyprian we may cleare it, against the faction of Fortunatus and Novatian. Downe with Episcopacy as a Tyranny maintaining Monarchy for no other end, but to depresse the Parliament, as some of them said they would make boyes of it, and whip them by a Regall rod. God make them all righteous under the divine rod to heare it. The Doctors charity in prayer is to adde to that side that is set against the King, pardon for pretended love, that wounds his person and power, our peace and prosperity. We shall soone have done with the Dr. and tell him his charity is nothing against the truth. Monarchy is onely from God, what word teacheth him so to &illegible; and shall conscience believe a lie to love the King more then other powers; the fifth Commandement will teach me no such thing, nor Rom. 13. 1. &illegible; the King will be great over his Subjects more then in them, the Dr. may load them with power, but the Parliament will get the love of the people that seeke to preserve them as themselves, and love is more naturall to our selves, then such as seeke to master us by their wills. Monarchy is the first power, and followes not the people, but divine providence, and flows through the Veines of nature in our parents, who beget Monarchs as naturally as they doe Children; O blessed birth they bring us unto, we shall all be Kings, and so we are by our Mother the Church, and our heavenly Father hath Mansions enough for us, God send us to them out of our smoaky Cottages, for we cannot abide in them, but we are fired out of them, by a lawlesse resistence of our liberties. All humane Powers are from Monarchy, and if the Parliament and People will prevaile without, they must perish. I hope some States have power without Monarchy, and I thinke ours hath none, without the Parliament, and the Dr. sayes so too, so the King be in it, and why will hee not? Because he will be without it, for the Dr. saies the Militia is his without it, and is not the Militia under law? and who may make that? The King without the Parliament, and so by the Doctors dispute he may doe all things by the Law of his owne will; for what he affirmes is Law, and what hee denies shall be none: And so good Night Dr. we are like to see no day, if that be your doctrine, God blesse us from it.

FINIS

THE SECOND PART AGAINST DOCTOR FERNE.

Not resolving Conscience by Reason and Scripture; but dissolving the State by possible, impossible, and unprofitable Suppositions, false and frivolous, odious and idle in a distracted Kingdom, where King, People, and Parliament had need to be comforted by better Testimonies then barbarous words.

Rom. 14. 1. Him that is weak in the faith receive you, but not to doubtfull disputations.

To the King a quiet and good Conscience.

IN a mixt Argument Divines may be deceived, and determine amisse. We admire what peace can come with an errour in the Proposition, with a greater evill in the assumption, and a mischief in the conclusion. Bracton of Jurisdiction saies it is wholly in the King for justice as the rule, for war as the means, for peace as the end, & it is most true a private person may administer none of them: and if the King were sufficient for them all, he alone should do them all: But being not able, he appoints his Ministers, & no private man presumes till legally he be called to his administration, and so all publique offices, and Courts of Justice are set up by the King, and then they become powers with him, and such ordinances of God, as no man may resist them; and here comes in the Divine, and if he deales before, God warrants him in his Art, he argues folly and presumption. Let the Lawyer first speak on his theame. Ea quæ sunt Jurisdictionis à privata persona non possunt possideri ea quæ sunt paris, ea quæ sunt belli, ea quæ sunt justitiæ, ad Coronam pertinent, neque ab ipsæ separari possunt, quia faciunt ipsam Coronam. Hence in Law the King hath nothing grantable from his person. It was in vaine for King John to give his Crowne to the Pope, for pious Edward the sixth to bequeath his Crown to his younger Sister, and for King Charles to sell away the Crown Jewels, or give away ought that is the Kingdoms from his own custodie, seeing he alone is trusted with all. To pardon Felons, a grant from himself is invalide, and as he hath power to grant nothing, so neither can he forfeit any thing he hath. This is true in personals, the Kingdom trusts none but himself, but it is not true in politiques, for there the Parliament is trusted with him, and hath power to grant more then the King can grant, and to it he may forfeit his trust, and in the mis-use or none-use of his Crowne, though they have determined they will not take it from him, yet it is more then ever Parliament declared before, and as a Divine I praise them for it, having Davids conscience to guide them; and for my part I shall hold the rule good, Praxis sanctorum est interpres præceptorum; But if we leave this evidence, Law will not readily be found to deliver a Tyrant from death and deposition. The Doctor in his Reply musters up the men he encounters, and chiefly he directs it against Mr. Bridges booke, framed for vulgar capacities, and licenced by Authority. To him he joynes the Fuller Answer, cryed up by the intelligent. The other two he sleights for little or too much learning; and the man with the Margent, he dare boldly leave to the trust of his Readers, so they will promise him one thing, said against Tyrants; and another, not to proceed without positive and direct warrant for Conscience to rest upon. In the 12. Section, he saies something to this deposer of Tyrants, and when he hath done that, he must say some thing to another, published by divers Divines, and printed by authoritie, who fully takes from him all his Scriptures and Reasons, and proves it lawfull to resist Tyrants, though it be not warrantable to depose them. I professe the comfort cannot come to the Kings conscience for ought he hath said upon his supposition. If he command legally, he needs no such succour from the Doctor, if against Law the Doctor wrongs him in his way, as being fitter to teach him repentance, then obduration in his sin, to punish an whole Kingdom with inevitable perdition.

Aristotle for Reason is said to be reason it self, and his undeniable principles presse the Doctor, and the first thing he saith of Sparta ruling Kings by the Ephors holds in our Parliament. For the treason it is not his, but the Parliaments that have deposed Kings, and it hath been done by Barons and Bishops, but now it is treason if the Lords and Commons will do it, which they professe they will not, not from the Law, for where is it? but their consciences from a good example against Papists the destroyers of powers, that would save the King to destroy the Parliament, which must be their last bite if he rise not with the Beast out of the bottomlesse pit, Rev. 11. 7. God preserve him, for the Papists have brought him to this last warre, consider it good King, and let not your Consort draw you into it: Read the text, for the time is come to fulfill it. The impertinences with which the Doctor ends his 12. Section I mind not but say plainly, if the Militia be the Kings to use it as he list, so will all jurisdiction be, and the Parliament shall have nothing to do with any kind of Justice, to the which doubtlesse peace, and warre are Appendixes. If your Majestie will have the Militia grantable to whom you please grant all from your Parliament, for Bracton makes your power alike in all for ordinary jurisdiction in the execution, but in the legislative power, and jurisdiction of Parliament it is not so, you must have others to joyne with you in all you do, and the Doctor teacheth you tyranny to do it alone, and then would quiet the people to do nothing but pray, and the Parliament count their fingers before they fight.

To the Parliament and People a good and qviet Conscience before God.

MAlignants look upon you as Hypocrites, and sinners in Sion, Isa. 33. 14. But you upon the everlasting Burnings, which the Doctor cals damnation, and to bring it upon you the Caviliers bid God damne them if they send you not to hell, out of which they are ascended, Rev. 11. 7. But you know your charge, to discharge your selves to send them back again to their own pit, and that is in the next verse, Isa. 33. 15. Walke righteously, speake uprightly, despise the gain of oppressions, shake hands with holding of bribes, stop your eares from hearing the cry of blood against you, and shut your eyes from seeing evill with delight. Remember the words of our Saviour, Matth. 10. 34. let the Sword be drawn to divide you from his enemies, Pacem habere debet voluntas, Bellum necessitas, love peace, and let necessitie force you to warre. Divines are become unfavorie, and Cajetan, a Papist, may teach them to speak. We the Prelates of Rome, do find Christs words true, Matth. 5. 13. we are become a scorne and prey not to Infidels but Christians, and why? Evanuimus, ac ad nihilum utiles, nisi ad externas ceremonlas, externoque bona. Rites and revenues are all we have regarded, and we and our Citie as salt that hath lost its savour, are trodden on by the French, that abuse us with all manner of violence. David de Augusta, Biblioth. patr. 13. p. 452. h. Sunt exteriores ceremoniales observantiæ, ut inclinationes, genu flexiones, quibus claustrales &illegible; in divino officio, quibus sæpe minus virtuosi sunt magis devoti. The true character of our Clergie at the Altar, and crucifixe against, Deut. 16. 21, 22. Hos. 8. 11, and 10. 1. Any Altar with Images is detestable to God, and their multitude a sin. Its true Antiquitie called the Lords table by no other name for 300. yeers, and they learned it, Rev. 8. 3. and 11. 1. That it is not Christ, the Angel in both places declares it, that it is for no materiall sacrifice, the exposition of the incense is sufficient, and the measure of it manifests the moneths of Apostasie in three Blasphemies, Rev. 13. 6. and do we tanquam pre Aris & focis strive for them? Its true our warre is civill, but why are Papists in it, but in confidence to raise their Religion. Tacitus tells us what betrayed us to the Romanes, Dum singuli pugnant, universi vineuntur: we fight one by one that all may be conquered; and whats the reason? in commune non consulimus, we heed not our Parliament. Rarus conventus ad propulsandum commune periculum, we meet thinly, and thicken not as one man. Frivola illa verba meum & tuum, said Chrysostome, those two words mine and thine are frivolous in the Church cause, and have caused many warres, but earth to the Saints, should be as heaven to the Angels to exterminate worldly thoughts. Rude people, are &illegible; pascua, the Souldiers eat them up. And Lewis the 12. said more, that souldiers were, Dæmonum pascua, Satan sollace. Duke d’Alva rosting some, starving others, said, I promised you your lives, no meat, such measure is given us, and all for want of resolution, and a good conscience, which is a continuall feast. Reade and fear not to find enough against the Doctors damnation.

The second part of the Subject, Object, Dutie, and Reasons, against Resistance, neither resolved, nor rightly replyed unto by the Doctor in all his Discourses.

THe person, Rom. 13. 1. is the subject charged, and is universally every man in any Common-wealth, which begins with an humane societie, and it is fundamentall that no man exempt himself from the power that is over him, no not the King the people choose to be over them; for it is done, juris consensu, by the consent of Law, and no Laws consent that Tyrants shall rule, but be ruled; for if Kings consent with the people to Laws, the Laws must rule, and none be freed from subjection. Powers are the object, which are applyed to all rulers, whether supreme persons, co-ordinate States, or subordinate officers to both. Peter tells us Kings are supreame, and we must submit unto them. Saint Paul tels us powers are supreame, and we must be subject unto them. Now these Powers may be in a Councell to decree Justice, or in Courts to see it executed, and both have their Officers to attend them, and so the whole power is distributed through the whole Kingdome, and comes to the very Constable of a village, who may no more be resisted then the King; and he is no good Divine that denies resistance of Kings, and cares not to teach the people to resist his Parliament, ordinary Courts of Justice, and their officers. All these powers may execute tyranny, and be resisted; As for example, to begin with the Highest the King, he may command the people to resist the Constable in preserving the peace, and to assist riotous and rebellious persons in killing the Townsmen, ravishing their wives and daughters, burning their houses, cartying away their goods and substance. The Constable raiseth the Town, armes them, fights with the Kings Caviliers, kils them, takes away what they have ill gotten, apprehends as many as he can, keeps them safe till he can informe the Higher powers, may be a Justice of Peace, and he raiseth the Countrey, sends to the Sheriffe, who armes the Countie, incounters with the Kings forces, kills them, and drives them out of his jurisdiction. The King is angry his Command is not obeyed, seconds his forces, till all Counties rise and resist the violence, and destroy their enemies. The King is still enraged he cannot have his will, he comes in person, and will have his power obeyed, the Parliament steps in for the whole Kingdome, cals for the Kings followers to be brought before them, the King denyes it, bids them resist, and go on with the riot and rebellion, he in person will joyn with them, and runs their hazards, the people hold on, and the Parliament with them, kill as many as they can, give the King warning not to be in their companie, as manifest Rebels to his Realme, and his own Crowne. He cares not for that, the power is his to subvert Religion, Laws, Liberties, lives, chastitie, mens estates, peace, and the very being and prosperitie of His Kingdome. Say not, God forbid, we have a good King, and I deny it not, but say against the Doctor, and the King hath a good people, and presume I may say as much for them against the King, as he hath said for the King against them, nay his words are against both, making the King a Tyrant by supposition, and his people rebels without it. Suppose the King he seduced, and bent to subvert Religion established by Laws, and the Laws that establish it, and every mans right, to take away mens lives and fortunes, cause rapine, and ravishment, rage and ruine to be practised over all his Kingdome, no man may resist him, nor his followers; and suppose they do, the Doctor concludes them to be Rebels. I suppose the contrary, that good subjects, suppose they resist illegall commands, said to be the Kings, nay, the King himself in the execution of them, they are no Rebels, but his liege people: and to say he may be killed in the multitude, is to accuse them that detaine him; for the people seek not his life, but theirs that would ruine both. [The duty subjection is obedience to just Laws, and submission to their just penalties. Many obey the King against his Laws, and thats no duty; many suffer with him to avoid just punishment, and thats neither any mans dutie. Subjection must then be legall, either I must do the will of the Law, or submit to suffer it, and the Apostle seems to excuse this, when he sayes not in opposition to subjection a negative deniall, but positive resistance is damnable; for he that will neither do, nor suffer the Law to proceed against him is just a Delinquent, or Royalist, to make the King a Tyrant, which the Doctor sees not, nor his blinded Disciples. The Parliament would try them that have wronged the people under the Kings protection: The King and they will not suffer it. Here’s no subjection active or passive to the Laws, they will neither do them, nor suffer for the breach of them. And here Christians suffered for Religion, not because they might not resist for Religion, but because Religion was against Law, the Law being civill, belonged to the second table, and Religion to the first, and good men are bound to both, and must in them obey, both God and man. God against Idolatrie, and man against rebellion. Man commands a false Religion, and by Law establisheth it. Now a Christian hath no Law to justifie him to take up armes for his Religion which belongs to another Kingdome, Joh. 18. 36. which allows not the servants thereof to fight with the subjects of another kingdome. But the Doctor hath put the case home, and with Religion, joynes Laws, and so both tables are for us, and we may defend both, against Papists and Malignants. The Law of God and man is for us; and for a Christian to say I may not resist a Papist, because the King armes him against Law is no reason, nor to destroy a Malignant that takes his part for his own defence in sinne. We are not under the King to do or suffer his will, but the will of our Laws, and such as rule us after them, even the very Constable before the King. As for example, upon the Doctors supposition, say the King bids a Malignant in any Town use his Commission of Array, and he armes his familie, and sets upon his neighbours houses, and the very Constable commands me to assist him, I will obey him legally, before I obey the King illegally.

The reasons against resistance are two. First, à genore, all powers. Secondly, I specie, the powers that are for government, or ordained of God. There is no power but of God, naturall, or civill. Thou couldest have no power to speake or do ought against me, no power at all, except it were from another, Joh. 19. 11. Bracton applied these words to the King, as Christ does to God, and both make a good harmonie in the truth. Jurisdictiones, &c. Jurisdiction and execution of Law, cannot be exercised by any private person, except that his power, datum fuerit ei desuper, be first given him from above: he meanes the King, the publique person of the kingdome, whose power is from God, whatsoever he doth even in his naturall capacitie, but that will neither justifie Pilate, nor him to judge amisse. But the second reason is full, that God ordaines or orders the powers, and as farre as they are his ordinance no man may resist them: and to say Tyranny is Gods ordinance is no where taught in Scripture; and how shall conscience beleeve it, without the conviction of the same, and where then is the texts taken up by the Doctor say nothing. God ordaines all sorts and degrees of Magistrates and Officers in a Kingdome, and as the precept is generall to obey them all, so is the prohibition, as generall that we may not resist the meanest of them. The Doctor applies all to the King, the Apostle to every one that hath power from him, or the Laws, and whosoever doth against them may be resisted: But you will say who knows that? Ask the Malignants, and they will tell you all the people against the Parliament, that makes and interprets them; for so they exhort to rebellion and insurrection, that the people should re-assume the power they have given to both Houses, and resist them in their ordinances, which the King saies he is assured are no Laws, but void in Law, because he consents not, and it is true if they meant they should stand longer then the Kingdome had need of them, and the two Houses judge them necessarie, because the King will not discharge his trust, but mis-use it to his own will, which he makes the Law to overthrow all Laws. For first he sayes he will rule by known Laws, and wills his people to obey him in them. Secondly, he and they shall judge of known Laws against both Houses, and so the last judgement is where it ought not to be, directly against the very first fundamentali, for where the legislative power is not, the people judge in vaine, and so does the King when he forsakes it, and rules after his own will. Its true the Doctor hath opened one way to mis-lead the people by their own wills, and the will of the King, and to should I another, if I should leave resistance at libertie for every man to judge of it. I have left it to the Law, and the Law-makers, and say by it and them tyranny may be resisted. Let the powers be legall, and no resistance is lawfull to the very Constable, let them be illegall, and they may be resisted to the Supreame, which is not to depose them, for thats illegall without Law, and we having no text to depose a King, and a plain one to resist him in his commands; for if resistance be regular, and kept within Laws, and tyrants will obey none, they may be forced to them, when they cannot be deposed by them: for if no reason nor Scripture lead us to that, we are tied from deposition, more then resistance, which must not be confounded.

No doubt the Apostles scope is wholly to urge obedience to the second table, the foundation of civill Laws in all States, and at this time in the Romane Empire, where we see the duty, subjection; the object, the Higher powers; the subject, every soule; the Christians more especially, whose Religion admitted no resistance, and that for good reason from their God, whose goodnesse subverted no Laws, but gave them power, and ordained that by them men should rule and be ruled, and that to them should be no resistance, and whosoever resisted, justly received both (κίν&illegible;) judgement, and (κα&illegible;&illegible;&illegible;μα) damnation. Humane and divine vengeance waited upon the wicked, not upon good works, for God appointed no rulers to be a terrour to such, and therefore no tyrants to rage against them, and to be afraid of them is not the same to feare the power, which he needs not do as from God; for Gods minister is to others for their good, and not their ruine. His end is not vanitie in vile affections to satisfie his own lusts, but according to Laws draw the sword and punish the offendours, and that not to satisfie the Magistrates wrath upon the body and goods, but Gods wrath which conscience was bound most to consider, though temporall wrath might be escaped. The benefit of Magistrates moves for their maintenance, and we pay them Tributes not for tyranny, but the good they do us. The Doctor is dumbe in the declaration of a good Watchman, Isa. 21. 6. Go set a watchman, and let him declare what he seeth. He must neither be blinde, nor tongue-tyed, that will teach others. If he will have the tower and table, take the watchmans wages let him look to his work, and not suffer the King to sit securely, when God is angry. The Army advanceth, and with heed the carefull sentinull sees the Lyon, or like one with a mightie voice awaketh the secure, and suffers not no notice to be taken, where truth is most necessary, as here it is, Army being ingaged against Army, booke against booke, and conscience against conscience. The first is dangerous to the body, the second to the soule, but the third to the peace of God; for if conscience erre, the heart may be quiet, but it can never be good.

Go we on with the Doctor and his damnable clauses, oppugning resistance of Kings carelesse of all others; when the text relates to all Magistrates and officers, as farre as their authority reacheth according to Laws, and not the Doctors sencelesse reasons. I may by Law no more resist a Constable then a King, commanding me to keep the peace, arresting me by a Justices Warrant, or distraining my goods by the same. Of all this the Doctor takes no notice, and that which is most notorious omits the power of Parliament nay, teacheth men to resist their ordinances to obey the meere pleasure of the King, and his not Officers, but Officials, that that against Law licentiously cite, cast out of the kingdome, this world, as unworthie protection, all that make conscience to obey legally: and because the King forbids aid to the Parliament, they denie it, and deale ill with all agents or instruments imployed by the Parliament, as if nothing were warrantable done by them. See the reasons against Registers, for Rulers are not a terrour to good works, but to evill. This cannot agree with tyrants, who are cleane contrary to the reason, as being no terrour to evill works, but to the good. He that subverts Religion, Laws, Liberties, cannot be the Apostles ruler. Nor the second reason which would be fencelesse being so applyed, Wilt thou not be afraid of the power, do good and it shall praise thee: will a tyrant do so that hates nothing more? Nor yet the third Argument, For he is the Minister of God to thee for good, so is no tyrant that ministers for evill. A fourth reason, not to beare the sword in vaine, is to punish where, whom, and when God pleaseth, but a tyrant does contrary. Fifthly, Conscience is stupid that makes no resistance to the subversion of Religion, Laws, and Liberties, like our poore that would have peace upon any termes, and rather suffer tyranny, then any trouble to advance the truth. Sixthly, is tribute payed to tyrants, or plous and just Princes? If all have their due, what deserves a tyrant? The Question not rightly stated, can stand no man of use for his quiet conscience, except he meane it should speak peace without Gods allowance. By this we may understand how the examples of Scripture move in this sense.

Saul against Law attempts his sons death, which is lesse then to subvert a whole State. The Doctor finds a resistance in this of words without weapons, and is that lawfull, Eccl. 8. 4. Where the word of a King is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? The word of a King may not be resisted by words, where God commands thee to keep his Commandement, and regard the oath thou hast taken, vers. 2. A loving violence the Doctor dreams of, and truth that is no violence may be used to oppose a lawfull command. But Saul sweares his sonne shall die to satisfie his rash vow, and the people sweare the contrary, and the contradiction carries it as farre as words can resist, and if they would not have served, their oath bound them to reall resistance, and better Saul should be forsworn then the people, and Jonathan perish. This was done in a private quarrell, and what saith the Doctor to our capitall controversie. The Caviliers have cursed themselves in a combination against the Parliament to dissolve it, and they hold the King in their company, carry him into the field like traytors, against all love of him and his kingdome, when we read of others, that have so loved their Prince, as they have taken all his evils to themselves, and wished him the wrong should be upon them, and so the Parliament would not onely have it, but lay it upon them; and yet these wretches wave all from themselves, & load their liege Lord with all their lewd actions; and not only so, but suffer him to appear with them where danger is: when Davids armed men seeing his hazards, would endure the King to enter no more into the battell, as worth a thousand of them. But these having done all the villanies, adde this to all the rest, to urge the King to keep them company in the greatest perils. But the note I observe from the people, is to advance the King, and his Counsell, to sweare they shall not die upon the place, where all the powers of the kingdome are; and such an Association I shall entreat may be blessed of God. Destroy them, and Charles may have a being as his Caviliers please, and so shall we, but better not be at all, then to be so miserable. David resisted Saul with armes. The Doctor deales daintily with this, and delivers foure Answers. First, David did it to secure his own life. Secondly, not to hurt Saul. Thirdly, the supposition cannot satisfie conscience. Fourthly, the example is extraordinarie. The first is false, for Abiathar is bidden by David to abide with him, and not to fear, and makes their calamitie common, and promiseth him protection, against Saul, 1. Sam. 22, 23. and in Keilah he is resolved to do it; and by Abiathar is directed (the Ephod being brought him) and it appeares by the Councell of Warre, that David and his men meant to resist Saul, it God had said Amen to the consultation, who in his wisedome provided othewise. But the Doctor addes, if Sauls cut-throats had come to take away his life, David would not have spared them, and therefore meant to make use of his Armes. Its true he hurt not Saul when he might have done it, 1. Sam. 26. 10. and yet sayes in Battell he might justly perish, which if at any time it had happened between them, as it might have done; David excuseth himself, and refused not, voluntarily so to have fought with Saul, 1. Sam. 29. 8. for his king he was forced to serve by Sauls cruelties, and counts him an enemie to be resisted in an hostile manner; and doubtlesse if God at any time had cast him upon a Battell he would have used his Armes, and not laid himselfe and his Forces at the feet of Saul and his cut-throats to have been destroyed. To kill the King is not the same with resisting him, for the intention is not the same, neither does any valiant man use his vertue, as the Beast of the bottomlesse pit does, Rev. 11. 7. to overcome and kill, but if he kill it is to overcome, and victory is the end of his violence, and then mercie his merit.

The supposition is certain; for David asks two questions before he depart. First whether Saul will come to besiege Keilah. Secondly, whether the men of the place will betray him, meaning plainly to have stayed, if Keilah would have been as true to him, as he had been to them; and when God saies they will not, as an ungratefull people, David departs from the danger. His fourth Answer is idle, for to use miracles when he hath meanes is to tempt God. He had his armes, and God without them could have protected him, and if he had promised it, he did ill to use any other meanes, then wholly to have trusted God; but as he had no word for that, so it was not his way, and his wisdome served him in the ordinarie course of Gods providence. To make it extraordinarie in his designation and unction, as a King to succeed Saul, is dangerous, for so he may teach the Heire to resist, because he hath a right to the Crown. Another piece of learning the Doctor leaves us to make the way damnable rebellion in all others, and onely religious in David for his unction, as if God had meant all but David should be damned for resistance, and when Gods anointing strengthened his faith, his fear should exceed all mens to use such means as no man else might have done. As for them that conceive the example nothing in sparing of Saul, I for my part in this, I make his practice, the interpreter of a precept, and what David in dutie did to Saul not to kill him when he might, ought to be in every mans mind armed as David to spare the Lords anointed, and hinder other from hurting him, and yet to save themselves harmlesse against tyranny. Our next example is both of words in speaking, and 80. Priests, valiant men in forcing the King out of the Temple, 2. Chron. 26. 17. 20. which seems to be more then words, to have him out of the Temple, as Athaliah was fetched out. That the king was discharged of his kingdome is not true, and if leprosie might depose a king, tyranny is worse; but the two Houses are examples to us all, both of their thoughts, words and deeds, calling God to witnesse to depose the king, or procure his death, is to them most odious; and yet to resist to save the kingdome, and Gods true Religion, is most deare unto them. Our last example of resistance is in Elisha, who commands the doore to be shut to save his own head. This speaks little, saies the Doctor, and yet force it is, and Sir John Hotham might better shut the Gates of Hull, then the Prophet his doores, to deliver many from danger, and doubtlesse private men may save themselves in their owne houses, against violent and illegall assaults. He grants it to persons suddenly set upon and so all resistance is not unlawfull; and may we not safely say much more against deliberate, mischievous, and plotted violence? But his fetch is a crosse blow which may not be given, for that offends which is more then defence. A woman that defends her chastitie may draw blood with her nailes, which she does unwillingly, and so he that defends himselfe may be forced to offend another, rather then die himselfe: and David directs well to hold our hands, as long as we can help our selves from danger. The Doctor saies the whole kingdome is concerned in the person of the king, and so is it in the Parliament, and more in that then the King, and we yeeld our persons to protect them; and though our parents be deare unto us, yet, Patria, our Countrey is dearest. We may loose our fathers and subsist, but not the representative Body that beares us all and sustaines us from all injuries. The Doctor tells us what tends to the dissolution of the whole, as Schisme, and yet tels us not who make is, and we wish they that do it were cut off, as members mischievous to the whole. His thoughts of single persons, and not of a considerable Bodie is needlesse shifting, for what one may do against tyranny, many may do the same. Yes, saies he, against outward force, but not as one part against another. If the King imploy his own subjects to tyrannize over the rest, they must suffer; but if he use strangers, we may kill them. Kind Doctor, cruell Teacher, who can beleeve such Divinitie? Elisha defended but one against a sudden passionate command, and shall not the two Houses trusted with the whole kingdome, seek remedie against long plotted designes to destroy Religion, Laws and Liberties? Surely the examples say something in particular cases, but conscience may confide much more in the universall good studied for us all by them that sit in Counsell, deserted by such as would destroy us.

The Allegations of the Doctor are more strange then strong, urged not as arguments to purpose or his owne propounded question, as the 250 Princes against Moses and Aaron, of whom the Doctor cannot suppose they were bent to subvert Religion, Laws, and Liberties, and therefore to rise against them was damnable. This cannot justly be supposed, and that the Princes suspected it by their words, Ye take too much upon you: is no other but an opinion of pride more in themselves, then Gods servants, which God resisted, and they received testimonie of the truth by a visible demonstration. His second Scripture is to the purpose of a tyrant, but teacheth not the Remedie, 1. Sam. 8. 11. To cry was in vain, for God would not change his mind to punish them, neither should they pray with any promise. They should find Saul a king to their minds, to rule them as Pagans did, to whom the Lord gave them too; for Kings they had, few good, when their Judges were most so, to shew the contented how God can provide for them: but discontented persons cry, and are crossed; for after their native kings strangers ruled them, and in that way they perish by the Monarchies, and the last in Daniel is said to prosper, till divine indignation be satisfied, Dan. 11. 36, which is come upon them to the uttermost, 1. Thess. 2. 16. Furthermore the punishment in Samuel is in goods and lands, which losse is lesse then Religion, Laws, life, and chastitie; and though a tyrant in the first be tolerable, yet in the rest he that resists not is, felo de se, to suffer himselfe to be murthered contrary to Law, a coward that having Law for his religion will loose it to them, that against Law arme to destroy it: and seeing Magna Charta gives us a threefold right, jus personarum, the securitie of our persons. Secondly, jus rerum, the right of our goods. Thirdly, jus actionum, the right of Law, we are not worthy of our priviledges dearly bought from tyrants with blood, if we will not venture some of it to save our selves. Si non esset qui justitiam faceret, pax de facili potest exterminari: Bract. fo. 107. our peace without justice perisheth. The King denies to do this at the request of his people and Parliament, which his oath tyes him unto, 6. H. 7. and his first creation and election, so saies Bract. Ad hoc creatuest, & electus, ut justitiam saciat universis: and he saies further, the King sweares unto it; Se esse præcepturum, & pro veribus opem impensurum ut Ecclesiæ Dei, & omni populo Christiano, vera pax omni suo tempore, observetur. The people and Parliament have petitioned him to settle the Militia, the meanes of peace, and he without them, and the counsell of others hath raised it to the destruction of both; and the Doctor adviseth both to sit still, and let him do what he will, and so comes to his third text in the power of the Trumpets, Num. 10. and its true, Magistrates and Ministers are charged with them, and if they warne not the people, God will call for their blood at their hands, and yet it may be upon their own heads too, if they take no care for themselves, when Enemies invade them. Satan would be glad of such a Doctor, that he might come in upon a Christian carelesse, because his Watchman cares not for him, and so would Spaniards, Irish Rebels, and Papists be glad, the people would be secure, and sit still, because they may not stirre except the King command them; and if he forbid them to heare the two Houses, they must heed no other but his Trumpet, giving them the Alarme in all townes to arme for him, and his will. The hardest accident of warre is the heaviest argument the Doctor hath. The fury of the Ordinance puts no difference twixt King and common souldiers, but discretion does, and who are wanting in that the meanest man may judge, and a few questions will satisfie. The State may not sacrifice Religion. Laws, and Liberties to those that would subvert them to save any one person in the kingdome. It needs not be a question, the position is firme without it. Secondly, the necessitie of so hard an Accident, must have a cause, and what is, per accidens, must come to some cause, per se, say what it is, and then see the errour owned, and the fault laid where it should be. And here I would ask the Doctor a question, if Saul will go down into the Battell where God promiseth him no protection, and David be on the contrary side, as at Keilah where he would have stayed, what if an arrow or stone from the wall kill the King, is he not guiltie of his own death? We know he died in battell, and David should have been against him, and would, if providence had not prevented it; what say you, had David deserved damnation for the fact, when Saul had banished him to another kingdome, when in his own he left the Philistines to fight with his owne servant, and now in another kingdome cast out and commanded by his Lord, if he had been with him when Saul died by his Army, had he not been guiltlesse? His Majestie hath great reason to be ruled by his Parliament, and fight with the Philistines, the Irish Rebels, but he leaves them, and with his Parliament and people fights at home, who to defend themselves, their Religion, Laws and Liberties, take up Armes, more justly then ever David did against Saul in his private defence.

We will suppost it as the Doctor does it is for Religion, Laws and Liberties, the case will be just, if it be so, and that it is, all men may judge how Religion hath been abused by Papists and Popish Bishops, Laws by injustice and oppression, Liberties are left to the arbitrary will of the King, who out of his Parliament, against it, hath raised such a warre, that he hath left the Subject no other subjection, but slavery, remedilesse without a Parliament, for the Kings way is conquest, and that the Doctor sales is the Kings title, and he will now make it good if he may prevaile, which I wish he never may, and it is no ill wish to him or us all, if ever we turne againe to our right minds, being miserably distracted; and I pray God no more blood may be letten out of the veines, then may cure us.

The return of the Doctor out of the Old Testament into the New is with a tang and touch to his own shame; for he askes his adversaries in this Argument, why they use the Old Testament, and not the New? would he have us adde Armes against Law, and yet our Saviour toucheth both, bidding his Disciples sell their garments to be girt with swords, and he had them in his company, and Peter used one of them not to defend himselfe, but his Master against his will, and smites at the head, and the hand of providence directs it to the right care, to shew what the Jews wanted in hearing, but he heals the care, and seldome did it without the heart; and Malehus was made whole and happy by that hand that touched him: and though the sword was condemned in Peter, and all men that use it without a warrant, yet our Saviour warrants the buying of it, and using of it to defend our selves. And to satisfie the Doctor in the New Testament, I conceive the sword came to the Church, Revel. 12. 5. We know how the rod of iron succeeded against Maxentius, Maximinus, Licinius, all Tyrants, and the Christians had an hand in it, in taking part with Constantine, as they did afterwards with Theodosius, and resisted for Religion. The Waldenses have done the like, so have the Princes of Germanie, the States of Holland, and Queone Elizabeth hath helped them, and the French, and so have &illegible; Kings since, but with no good successe, because not heartie and constant; for they have joyned too much with Papists, and we are justly punished for it; But if he will view the texts, let him take these for our times, Revel. 11. 9. we should be buried for this last bite of the Beast, if God favoured us not in these warres. The Angel of the waters, that is, of wars, blesseth Jesus Christ, that he hath given our enemies blood to drink, Revel. 16. 6. and they are blessed that do it, and are the called, chosen, and faithfull, that fight with the Lambe against Bishops or rivo-horned Beasts, and all Kings that take their parts, Rev. 17. 14. And to say they hate the Whore that honour the Papists, puts me to a non-plus, ver. 16. God put it into their hearts that do not, v. 17. for there is hope that they shall help Christ, that have been deluded by Antichrist.

Come we with the Doctor to his learned discourse upon the New Testament, and he is upon the supposition. Suppose that the King is supreme as Peter calls him, or the higher power as St. Paul. The first needs not be supposed, and the latter is a meere supposition, and both to no purpose, and I will suppose with him. Suppose all powers tyrannize to the very Constable, may we resist them all, none, or some? set down who may not be resisted. The Doctor sales the King, Rom. 13. 1. But in the second verse he saies by power may any Magistrate be meant, and in that verse is the resistance, why not he then as well as the King? If he answer, the Law resists all under the King, why then not the King, if it be above him? And if armes may be opposed to restraine any tyranny against Law, why not against all that use it? I do but suppose it, as the Doctor does, the King may. Take St. Pauls words in the superlative, and the Parliament in England is transcendent to the King in the Legistative power.

But the Doctor three wayes works the King into the Supremacie. First, by distinction. Secondly, subjection. Thirdly, petitior. Distinction, all power is supreme, or subordinate. The distinction is true, but not of the King, for he alone is not supreme, he hath his co-ordinates. Secondly, many are Governors he send, not, and in some States where they have no King to send them, but God and the people; and if Peter be so meant, that God sends both Kings and Governors, the Doctor is out, and the text may be so taken; but take it how he will, the people send powers from themselves, that in Parliament vote as freely as the King, and may affirm and denie as well as he. The Spartans had two kings, and both ruled by the Ephori, and he is truly supreme that is so called by the Law, and then we know that He is under it, that is, the Law, the Legislative power, and Parliament. The Oath is answered by them that made it, as being against forraigne powers, and the Pope, and persons in the Realme, not the great Authoritie in it, for the King is no such a Supreme, as to have authoritie to do what he lift. That the two Houses petition as under the King is right and true for their persons, which they subject unto the King, but not their power and trust; for by the Kings owne words to the 19. Propositions he propounds enough to satisfie the doubt, and just with the text that tyranny may be restrained legally by the two Houses, and that sometimes cannot be without Armes. Its true no subordinate power may legally resist the Supreme; but to subvert Religion, Laws, and Liberties is so farre from legall, that legally it may be resisted.

Fundamentals of Government common to all States, stand tottering as much as the Building, and the people lay them in the sand by the Doctors deseants and syllabicall Divinitie. Its fitter for a good Lawyer, or expert Statist, then Divine to deale with such Doctrine; and I must needs confesse he rather casts carelesly his stones upon heaps then placeth them orderly in the bottome of the worke. He holds a correspondencie of fundamentals with the established Laws of all kingdomes, as limited by them. The safetie of the whole is fundamentall, as all the elements to prevent vacuitie move contrary to their standing, as water will ascend, Aire descend, and in the creation with the constant nature of the Heavens and their Inhabitants, Gen. 1. 1. 2. was created an earth called all things in matter nothing in forme, to be the beginning of all elements and elementaries in this sublunarie and inconstant world, it touched the third heaven, and though it self was void of forme, yet it had a miraculous being and preservation to preserve the Universe; and in the top of it was formed the first Element, and so of the rest to the bottome, which we call the lowest earth, and the creatures so serve one another that they had rather forsake the horbs, then suffer a crany of the earth to be without aire or light; And so in the case of our kingdome, the King holds the highest orbe, but must descend to the necessities of his people, and being trusted with the Militia must not use it as he doth, like the lightner Salmoneus, Apoliodor. de Orig. Deor. l. 1. to daunt his people, as he did the wavering Greeks, and towne of Elis, who flastor his torches till God from heaven with true lightning destroyed him and his Citizens: So may we perish in our thundering, if our Ordinance be not better limited, the King may not so discharge upon his people, and ruine the fundamentall of their safetie in Parliament, which does onely discharge his trust for a time till the people be secured; and if the elements roare thus amongst us, the people must up and reassume with the Parliament their owne selfe preservation, till the King will remember that he is for the peoples edification, and not their destruction, as now be is moved by some Monsters in nature, that had rather eat thorow their mothers wombe, then not be born to vent their wickednesse. The Doctor calumiates in two things, as if ordinarie emissio as were to be resisted, and the King not discharging his trust punctually, might have others to enter upon it: whereas the state of the Question explained by himself is this, A King subverting Religion; Laws, Liberty, &c. which is more then the non-use of his trust, a mis-use of it in the highest degree, and deserves duty to God and man to do all that may be done to deliver from the danger in the right way the subjects have alwayes gone, as the people did with Hezekiah against Sennacherib, 2. Chron. 18. 7. Secondly, the people and Parliament re-assume the power no longer, till they be secured of the danger; for as we have said, a man may loose his right for a time, have it taken from him, or what is most proper transmitted to others, when the partie is not able, or will not use it as he ought to do; and we may rather say this fundamentall is reserved at the first, as most naturall to all estates, to make use of it in case of necessitie; power, saies the Doctor in his definition, is a sufficiencie of authoritie to command a people, and he thinks so necessarie that all men are to be under it, as from God and nature, which is true of families, but not of Nations, for God never appointed any Nationall Government till Moses. If so, all men are naturally free, and when they agree in a policie, not being divine, the people wholly chuse it, and can by no command be forced unto it.

He proves wittily his own work, Rom. 13. 1. 2. the man is inspired like Paracelsus, with all spirits, for he draws must out of the text, and yet it is not before the powers are; and except divine, they are not before the people will: as a woman is a wise by Gods ordinance when she hath consented to her husband, but she needs not consent before she will; and the Doctors co-ertion is of the text, not of the truth, for he forceth it to his fancie, and falnes a fable of the dutie to be as naturall to a king, as a mans father that begot him. To fundamentals he addes for feitures, and &illegible; it in the supreme trust, and it were good, if he received it from God without the people as Moses did; but saving this Nation he cannot name one more, and the text will tell him that not one Nation more under heaven was so great and happie, Dent. 4. 7. 8. Our Divines have studied themselves into a dreame of nature for grace, and magnisie kingdomes too much, to give them the divine benediction from universall Grece. Let God be true, and every man a Iyar; God hath not dealt with all Nations alike. I make no question when the Doctor sees his errour, that the power to be a king comes from the people by humane election, he will stand no longer upon divine right, then the ordinance of God to establish the orders men have freely put themselves under, and that by reservation and re-assumption as often as need requireth, and good kings should count it no resistance, but an happie remedie to have his people joyne with him in Parliament, and them a pest and plague that drive him from it. The Doctor trimly tries his wit with distinctions of power in the clouds, the designation in the people, and qualification in the subject. The power he hangs in the &illegible; to drop from heaven upon kings, before the people know it, and then the people shall designe the person, and his qualities shall be either what he will, or others will him to do. When in my apprehension the people designe the person first, then God ratifies the power, and that no further then its legall; which if it degenerate into tyranny is none of his. The Doctor hath done the King a great displeasure, to suffer men to dispute the case further then the Parliament hath determined, which pretends no right to all, but so much as may save the kingdome, and the Doctor in denying this, hath opened a gap from a qualified forfeiture to one that is absolute, and some books so sing, and say more then the Doctor will answer; but both Houses must stay the Argument, and he will undo the King if he denie all, even a transmission to his Councell, which he may yet do by consent; which if he do not. I dare say he sees not his owne danger to hazard both himself and Parliament upon the people, for Pamphlets of the worst Malignance have counselled the people to re-assume their power from both, and play their own game, which will be the worst piece of our warre, and the dissolution of all to the lowest foundation; which I would have the people to consider in the words of our Saviour, Matth. 24. 2. His Majestie makes Officers for terme of life, and the Law gives them their right, yet it is not so firme, but some fault may void it. Secondly, others have Honours, Quandiu bene se gesserint, and they are secure till they be convinced of some misbehaviour. Thirdly, they are most at will, that by a Writ of Ease are discharged, because the grant was, Durante bene placito. I would be loath the Majestie of the people should presume to do the like, and give the Law; farre better that holds us to the legislative power where it is. We are upon another case, the law of necessitie that goes farre, the wise parts with all to her husband, and that in necessaries she may supply her wants. Hezekiah in this case made bold with the Temple, and David with the shew-bread, and our Saviour warrants it with good use, I will have mercie, and not sacrifice; and if the King will not see this, the Doctor in too blame to keep it from him. The Doctor complains of injurios, and augments them, if the Parliament will take the power from the King, yet they should leave it to his Heire. He complaines without a cause, they intend neither, but have complained of Gods Ministers discharged without a crime, as many old Justices of Peace the people want, and of them God speaks, as well as of the King. Its true God is the God of order, and leaves not every man to do his will, nor resist at pleasure, but in case that be true the Doctor supposeth, the resistance is lawfull, and though the head be more honoured then any other member, yet in a frensie, if it be not held by hands, the surious man may knock out his brains against his own bed-posts. In resistance we rise not to death and deposition, and if that may have construction in the Bill of Divorce, it was yeelded to the man to put away his wife, and Josephus relates of a woman that put away her husband; yet God that allowed the one for the hardnesse of heart, did not allow the other; and we may grant more to a King then to any other in discharging some men, yet his heart should never be so hardned, as to send away his subjects with such constant frownes, and as for them I shall never think how they may discharge the King wholly of his trust; yet if a husband would kill his wife, she may resist him, and call in her neighbours to help her.

Fundamentals and forfeitures are handled, and now comes in the means of safety. I name no Sections, for they are rather so called, then righty resolved by any method, the Doctor intending to play with his matter as boyes do at the cudgels, to canvase one another with crosse blowes. Salus populi in a good sense, is suprema lex. The sense must be his own, for the stabs necessitie at the heart by the popish plea to save the Church, which, he saies, is the Philistines Forge, and Antichrists schoole; and for this we shall scourge him. Our Saviour allows us no Armes to defend Religion but by the second Table. Truth is uniform, and puts no Bishop out of his Rotchet into an Helmet, for then the Turke would take up the argument as he did with the Pope, having disarmed a Prelate, saying in his message sent him, Vide an ea sit tunica filiitni, Father look how you clothe your children. The Catholique faith is above Armes, and the weapons of our warfare more mightie then they, to break into such holds as they cannot come neer, even thoughts to captivate them to the will of God, 2. Cor. 10. 4, 5. But States are not so preserved, nor any person in them, but se defendendo is a plea in nature, and so in any kingdome to keepe it from tyranny, and where God hath not provided for it, as he hath done for his Church, the means are gladium materiale, and politicum in Parliament, which is in no Church Synod. The Senate of Rome after the people have given Cæsar too much, used the Sword against him, and spared not Nero, who if he could have taken them away with the sword, would not have attempted it by poyson: but they pay him in his right kind, and force him to flie, and follow him so hard, that to escape their sword he kils himself. That of Tertullian is true for ought I know, and though I will not follow the Fathers in faith, yet for fact I shall yeeld them more credit, and answer for them, they resisted not the Law to preserve the Gospel, but followed their Master, and fought not for his kingdome but by their prayers and teares, and prevailed by their blood, Revel. 12. 11. and they shed blood too, Rev. 6. 12. The Altar was the Embleme of the fifth Seale, and an earthquake of the sixth which changed the Empire, and it was done by warre, and Christians were deep in the blood of Pagans, and shall not need to feare to be as deep in the blood of Papists by the fifth Commandement, obeying Magistrates, and the sixth preserving themselves, which for faith I wish no man to do, he may die for that if the Law be against him; for I will not defend pietie by any injustice, or Religion by any injurie. The Doctor importunately urgeth, Rom. 13. 2. and let Nero be the man, seeing he is all for the person. He that resists Nero shall be damned, but the Senate resisted him, and yet there was no &illegible;μα against it, but great rejoycing in it, and all the people, Psal. 58. 11. and 107. 42. nor &illegible;α&illegible;ί&illegible;&illegible;μα, the Doctors damnation. And one thing more I would have him take notice of, when Christians opposed both Cæsar and the Senate, as first when they took part with Constantine and the Senate, Secondly, with Theodosius both against Cæsar, and the Senate. The Senate caused Gratian to be murthered, because he would not be their high Priest, and set up Maximus in his roome, who is slain by Gratians Generall, and then Eugenius appearing for the Pagans against Theodosius, the Christians assist him, which sheweth plainly tyrants may be resisted. And the Doctor does ill to state his Question of a tyrant, for Kings no man disputes against them, nor any Magistrate the ordinance of God, and whiles the Doctor deals so basely with the Parliament to raise up arms against it, he justifies them in resisting that which he states to be tyranny. He is forced to yeeld resistance, but it must be reasonable, as if all men were beasts that were not of his mind.

Its true three agreeing make the State farre more secure, and it were happie it were so now, and very honourable to the King that will not, because in the Militia he will be alone, and rather loose his kingdome, then consent unto it with his Parliament, which is the maine difference: and if he may do with us in warre after his own wisedome, the nise men of his kingdome shall not onely be dis-regarded, but we shall be destroyed: And by the same reason he may challenge Ea quæ sunt belli; by the like argument ea quæ sunt pacis are in him alone; and if both these, then ea quæ jurisaictionts sunt, and adde, ea quæ sunt justitiæ, and he shall have all praxi & peacepto, and both Houses may dissolve, and come home for fools. But he is a wicked foole that perswades the King to this tyranny, and teacheth him to undo himself, and all that truly love him; and whiles he trusts these, he is betrayed to his own ruine. The King pretends faire for his armes, that it is done to save Religion, Laws, his own rights, &c. and saies further, both Houses go about to subvert all by faction, as they say he does by ill Counsell; and the Question so stated puts tyranny upon them, and the Apostles arguments cannot make it damnable to resist them, being tyrants, but the Doctor will not yeeld them so much as to be among the Higher powers: but that singularly must be kept for the King. The King saies better by faction they may be seduced, and &illegible; to subvert all Government, which if they should, I see no reason but the King and Kingdome may resist them: but this is a case that never was, and subverts the greatest fundamentall we have; for when we say every man may defend himself by the law of nature, and the State by the Law of Nations, in our Nation we have no other fundamentall, but the Parliament, and the King was never so counted, and we trust not him without an oath, but we dare trust both Houses unsworne as our very selves. But the Doctor states the Question personally, if a Prince, for suppositions possible may be and conclude when they are what may be done, or not; but suppositions impossible conclude no such thing, but give way to reason, where, ficta negunt fidemque faciunt, where fables may fanfie true things. Cade, and Tyler may tell us of Tyrants, and so hath the Doctor done ill to teach it, and to preserve them without resistance for fear of rebellion against better men, then let the best judge of it, and the people follow the Parliament, and pray for the King he may return unto it, and force them no longer to preserve the Kingdome out of the hands of mischievous Monsters, which will soone shrink into their holes, if their pretended Head forsake them, and hold with His Houses, the proper place, and Center of all his legall actions: as the Kingdome now moves off the hooks it makes many giddy brains, and if this Vertiga be not speedily cured, an Apoplexie will follow. I have done with the Doctors disgraces, and will give him a table of sundrie words, as followeth.

Supreme Law, Power, Trust, Right Re-assumption, Reservation, Return, Dr. Fernes Fundamentals, Forfeitures, Factions Truth, Tyranny, Resistance, Damnation

SVpremacie of Law, Power, and Trust, the Doctor understands not. He supposeth a Trust from God, such as Moses had, Hebr. 3. 2. 5. A trust appointed by God, as a servant to him alone, and accountable to him onely. And good reason, for God committed his people to him, gave him power over them, and the Law by which he should rule them. And Moses makes this a distinction between the Nation of the Jews, and all Nations, Deut. 4. 7, 8. What Nation? that is, no other: and it is in two things, Revelation and righteousnesse. God nigh in prayer, and perfect in truth. The Doctor derives the Kings trust from God, we from the people, as all Nations did when they trusted their Governours, and consequently their power proceeded from the same fountain, and so did their Laws; and the Church hath spoyled the Kings of the earth to make their Monarchies as Divine, as the Dynastie of heaven that ruled not after the wils of men, but the Word of God. Hornes scatter Gods people, Zech. 1. 18. and Hammers breake them, or Axes cut them off. The like is in the Revelation of wicked Hornes, and may be resisted as all Ages testifie. Not the powers of God, but the tyrannies of men: and when the text speaks of Smiths and Carpenters to do it, it declares his providence for his Church, and we observe it not in divine justice; but, like the Doctor, think hurtfull Hornes have right to do any thing, and no remedie, but patience against them. He mistakes the Nations, and would have the powers as immediately from God, as Patriarchs, Judges and Kings are ruled by God, as having the Law from him, and so ruled not as they list; but we have our Laws from men, and they impose upon the King. The &illegible; of his power is from his people, and they grant him the trust he is bound to answer them; and therefore we adde they reserve their right in it, have power to re-assume it in the right way of Nature and Nations, which children and servants cannot do in families, but in Nations it may be done in all of them, save the Nation of Judah with his brethren, and Genealogies exactly observed to Christ, are forbidden after his birth, Tit. 3. 9. Veritie before, is vanitie now, and we are to beware how we reason from texts, when we turn them to our own teaching. A returne we make to the King and his Heire by our fundamentals of three Estates, and if that be true, that no Act of Parliament can be made, without the consent of the Lords, we must understand it of the Lords temporall, for the Judges have resolved it, 7. H. 8. Killway. fo. 184. B. that the King with his Lords Temporall, and Commons, without the Spirituall Lords, may hold his Parliament, and therefore Bishops are not so essentiall, as the Doctor would have them. And it is further resolved, that the King having called a Parliament, and the Barons will not come, the King with the Commons may preserve the kingdome, and doubtlesse if the King depart after his &illegible; the Lords and Commons may do it: but it is fundamentall, that without the Commons nothing can be done, all right and remedie being in the people, whom they most orderly do represent. I confesse the representation is in the whole Realme, but the basis is the people. The Doctors fundamentals I understand not, but that which is the great one I kene well enough, Salus populi suprema lex My Lord Cooke. 18. E. 2. 27. 10. Rep. 139 B. Keighleyes C. Nota, saies he, Reader upon a particular case of a wall against the Sea, that the Defendant was bound to repaire and suffered it to decay, the Plaintiffe recovered Damages, and why saies he? Because it was pro bono publico, and brings this fundamentall Law, Salus populi, suprema lex, and the defendant was compelled to do it; not onely to satisfie the injurie done to the Plaintiffe, but lest the defect against the Sea, a common Enemie, the Common-wealth might suffer by it. Such hath been the care of the Judges for Common good, which being well pondered in these dayes, would doubtlesse make us more readie for publique safetie. A custome prejudiciall to a private man, may be reasonable for the generall, as building of Bulwarks upon anothers Land for the defence of the Realme. 36. H. 8. Dyer fo. 60. B. 29. H. 8. Dyer fo. 36. B. 21. E. 4. 28. 8. F. 4. 18. He that turnes his plough upon the headland of another may do it by the Law of Husbandry. He that dries his nets upon another mans ground is favoured for Navigation and Fishing. Common utilitie is the generall end of all Laws; but what is beneficiall onely to some particular man, such a custome is &illegible; to the law of reason, which is above all positive Laws, and if this be &illegible; Parliament, more then the King, or all his Judges, our foundation is naughtily laid, and its a mystery to me: Malignants fall to talke of knowne positive Laws against the Parliament, which is the reason of all the Laws we have; and our silly Doctor because the King is not in the Parliament, thinks it is deprived of all reason, and he would pluck up all foundations to plant the King in their roome, to rume all. I think he knows not what a Cerciorari meanes, and how cases may be removed for right, and to the best reason in the Law; and say it is in the King is to make Cæsar above himself, and the King may well forfeit his Judgement to the Parliament, which will never make him forfeit his kingdome from himselfe or Heire; and yet truth will teach as he receives his kingdome from no particular man, no more can he forfeit it to him, but take heed of the whole kingdome that hath given it him, which cannot make a faction in taking their own; and it will not be from the King, but the resistance of his tyranny, which the Doctor would teach, and damnation to all those that would save the kingdome. Good Doctor forbear, I once heard you lost your Notes when you were to preach before the Judges, and you preach terrible things before the greatest Judge; but I hope you have lost your Notes, and I will give you a few more from Jacobs Prophesie, and Judahs Royalty. I pray you remember it, we wish you well by our paines.

JACOBS PROPHESIE OF JVDAHS Royalty.

Gen. 49. 10. The Scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a Law-giver from betweene his feet, untill Shiloh come, and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.

DOctor Ferne is the Tripos of this Kingdome, and he prevaricates with all men upon his Stoole of three feet, a King, a People, a Parliament. For the King he finds him the first in Mankind, as naturall to his kingdome, as a father to his familie. The originall of many, and their efficient both procreant and conservant; as for the people they are so base borne, that he begets them to be his slaves. The Shiloh in our text gathers his people, and of the basest makes them all Princes, 1. Pet. 2. 9. but these Princes must submit to their King, ver. 13. Governours, v. 14. and these Governours too to him that sent them: and here the Tripos prevaricates to purpose. The King sends all Governours, therefore all subjects but the King, even his two Houses of Parliament though he send them not, but for them to direct him if he will, if not, he is to do as he list, and neither people nor Parliament may resist him. Not the people, for they are subject to powers; nor the powers in Parliament, for they are subject to the power, that is, the supreme power, which is the King. I hope the Tripos is a firme stoole, and cannot trip at the tribunall of Cæsar, and yet by Pauls Appeale he does, Act. 25. 10. He appeals from Cæsar in Judea in all Courts Civill and Ecclesiasticall to Cæsar at Rome, and that to some Court where Cæsar had his Tribunall, and may be above the Senate, the Star-Chamber, and High Commission was his Councell: but in England they are put down, as just grievances of the Subjects, where then is the Kings Tribunall, in his Privie Councell? but he that appeals to that had need of a Favourite to open him the doores, and when he is in, he hath no securitie to come out: But the King is there, and of him I may say as Seneca does, de Clement. li. 1. ca. 29. Securitas securitats mutua paciscenda est: Errat enim si quis existimet tutum esse Regem, ubi nihil à Rege tutum est. Vnum est inexpugnabile munimentum, Amor civium. Love is the Loadstone that stayes the people, and Armes are such Arguments as destroy right, and to rule by them may be the Kings rage, and the kingdomes ruine; which if the Parliament prevent not the people perish: and if Cæsar be there to do us justice, he may not deny it; and if he do, his will is not the supremacie, but the Law, which is never dead in a Councell, and therefore if the King be resolved, Rempublican suam esse, non se Reipublicæ: and that the kingdome must trust him, and not he his kingdome, as it is now in Parliament, we have no other Appeale to Cæsar but his person, and then I am sure the Doctors stool stands so upon their feet, that the longest will cast down all the rest; and if the two may not supply the other, it will never stand again: and doubtlesse the Doctor having made it too long, the Kingdome hath a Saw to cut it off till it may stand with the rest, with more securitie to all feet; for we stand not upon the predominancie of three Estates, but their equall poyze, and the Doctor when he hath prevaricated all he can, he must leave the King in the two Houses, and the two Houses to be his Tribunall for all Appeals; and we are not to follow Cæsar to his Camp, but Court of Justice; and if that doctrine of Armes they may resist any camp that comes under any other command of might or majestic. The Doctors text is taken in two senses, and prevaricatours do alwaies equivocate, and hide the distinctions.

The integrum of his text is an humane creation, and the members of it, are King and Governours; the cause, God finall or efficient, the effect subjection. The adjunct supreme, the end praise or punishment. The humane creation is divided into the King, and Governours, the Doctor denies it, making the King a divine creation, and Governours the creatures of the King. The cause finall is to obey for Gods sake, or his glory, the efficient, because God equally sends them both; and the text saies not that the King sends all Governours but himself, as the Doctor divides it without all reason, when he saies all powers, Rom. 13. 1. are either the King or Governours, and if Peter so distribute the powers, in St. Paul he contradicts him; for Paul saies all powers are of God, and Peter denies it, making Kings onely of God, and all other Governours of the King. Subjection is the effect of Gods command, the Doctor of the King, and that not onely of Subjects, but rulers, that must do his will, and not the Lords. The adjunct supreme is an indifferent word given to all powers, Rom. 13. 1. particularly to men in authoritie that are not kings, 1. Tim. 2. 2. and personally to kings, 1. Pet. 2. 13. and therefore the word being common not proper, concludes not for the Doctor; and the end makes against him, applyed to the Governours who are bound to the same end with the King, and therefore have the same office; and for the Lords sake, and not mans, are to exercise it. I would have our learned Criticke of words made into the text propounded, and consider what Dominion is declared by Scepter, and how it cannot be restrained to Kings, but any power, or Majestie of Government, under what form soever, and every Tribe is called by the name Shabet, and united under one staffe or power of Government. The meaning therefore is not, that Judah shall not cease to be a kingdome, but a State having jurisdiction, and so the seventy for Scepter translate not King, but Ruler, and therefore the Doctor is wide in kingly Royalty, to make it ancient or necessarie. A Law-giver is as generall as the former, and in Israel was not legislative in any, but declaritory in any Judges, and in this the Doctor is not constant in his notion concerning Law-makers, the highest powers in the kingdome, and if the King be higher then the highest he alone may challenge to himself to be our Law-giver; & the Doctor would have it so, and yet couples with him both Houses, and then again against them both, proclaimes what Laws he pleaseth, and accuseth the Parliament to do the same, and concludes neither have legislative power. He wanders so about a Law-giver, as he leaves us none in Parliament, if the King please to desert it; and the truth is Laws cannot be made without the expresse consent of three Estates: but the Doctor ignorant of the Scripture phrase, understands not that a Law-giver is either one that makes Laws, peculiar to God in Sion, or that does jus dicere, declare what it is to others: and so does the King by his Judges in all Courts of Justice, and is the Law-giver in none in neither sense, nor can denie either in his Courts of Justice; and if he should do it in the inferiour Courts, it would not stand for good Law, but in the supreme it must stand for any thing, and if he denie to be present, or consent nothing can be done, as if he had power to suspend the whole legislative power in the kingdome. God that suffered his people to be without Kings, never suffered them to be without Law-givers, and if the Doctor scorn not to be taught, the Royall Tribe wanted neither Scepter nor Law-giver when it wanted kings, as for more then two third parts of that time, namely, not till David, nor after Zedekiah, saving that of the Maccabees, who were Levites, and of Herod by originall an Edomite, or Idumæan Proselyte, which both put together were some eighty yeers: so that the Jews never wanted Rulers of their own, till Titus destroyed them. Pompey brought them under the Romane Senate, and then some say the Scepter departed. Others when Herod a stranger, yet formerly incorporated into the Jewish State and blood, was by the Romanes invested to be their king, and the Hasmonæan, or Maccabæan race extinguished. A third sort say the Scepter then departed when Titus took the Citie, and quite ruined the whole policie of Religion and Law, and this for my part I conceive to end the prophesie, and then Christ had the people of the Gentiles at his charge, and for his Church converted them to his Government, or destroyed them for it, and raised up in all times such Law-givers as liked him best, and changed them as he had done before, and his Scepter never since that time departed from his people, who whiles they were governed by the Cæsars were so ruled by them that they were for their good, as in the case of Paul judged by the Jews, delivered by the Gentiles; and though they died Martyrs for Religion, yet they had great peace from Pagans, for whom they prayed for the benefit they enjoyed. 1. Tim. 2. 2, 3, 4. First, worldly, in peace and quiet. Secondly, pious and civill, by godlinesse and honesty. Thirdly, pleasing to God, as very good and acceptable in his sight. Fourthly, a meanes to convert Kings and their kingdomes, as it did at the last, Revel. 12. 5. The Rod that ruled them before, is now theirs to rule themselves, and so hath remained to this day, and now for the Doctors learning I will move him with two Questions. First, Whether God makes Tyrants his Law-givers. Secondly, whether Law-givers may not resist Tyrants? For the first, he may look over the whole Bible, and all Histories, and find God and man destroying them as evill Beasts, and more to be hunted after, and destroyed then Lyons, Beares, Dragons, or any other evill Beasts whatsoever. Its true that the Doctor saies it is dangerous for private persons to prevent mischief, yet no man, if tell Beasts follow him, and he cannot flie from them as David did from Saul, yet he may do as David did, Arme, seek holds, keep them, and neither yeeld himselfe nor them to his Enemie, but keep him out, as Elisha did in his own house against the sonne of a Murtherer, 2. King. 6. 32. And if Subjects may not keep their own houses, and joyn with others for help, let Elisha and the Elders reason his cause, and the Doctor answer better then he hath done, and his Disciples doubt his doctrine is not good. Now if he shall say Elisha did it not as a private person, then what was he in regard of the King that came as a tyrant to take away his life. But the Doctor hath said enough to bring us into the second Question, for I am sure the first is not answered; but the second will set him more out of his way, what a Law-giver may do by the Scepter or Rod that is carried before him, or the sword that is given unto him. Doubtlesse they have resulted tyrants, and rebelled against them as the Judges did when Israel was oppressed, as the Kings did when they were in slavery. After them the Princes did it, and Nehemiah armed his men to resist the &illegible;, and the Army of Samaria that the Emperours Generals raised by his authoritie; and Nehemiah as a Magistrate prepares for fight. The Maccabees do the like, and where God gives Law-givers the people may be directed by them; and as &illegible; case is, the Doctor is foulely culpable to make no more of the Parliament, then of a private man. To deprive it of all legislative power, and bind it so to the King that he must do what he list, and no law against him, nor any power pus dicere, where the King will contradicere, By which meanes the Doctor makes the King a Tyrant, and defends his right against Law, and yet perswades it is Law, and so the Divine and the Lawyer are the true causes to turn a Monarchie into a tyranny, and defend it by the Law of God to be lawfull, and that our Laws limit our two Houses like Elisha to sit still, and provide for themselves by a Guard, but give no direction to others against Murtherers, nay, the Doctor denies them all preservation, and that they must cast down all at their Soveraignes feet, and let his messengers murther them, and the whole kingdome.

Seemingly seient, but really inscient are by Erasmus taxed bitterly in these words, Doctum genus indoctissimorum hominum, vix ad Doroberinam usque docti, They that are learned in Court flatteries, Camp cruelties, Schoole falshoods, Universitie universals, will teach Parliaments, and be Judges what they may do, when Kings feare them for their power, which they need not, it these Agents might be their Advocates; For the truth is, when a King calls a Parliament, he goes above himselfe both for action and authoritie, as what he cannot do by his ordinarie jurisdiction, he labours to be helped by that which is extraordinarie, and arbitrarie in the greatest supremacie, as not to be limited by any in the protection of the people, and if the King will do it, it is contrary to his office and oath, and not protecting himself, others must do it. Read these unreasonable words in his papers, promising securitie against his Parliament: It is no ill counsell for the King to withdraw himselfe so farre, and so long from the Parliament, because at London, he and many whose affections were eminent towards him, were in danger everyday to be torns in pieces; and at Yorke, his Majestie, and all such as will there put themselves under his protection, may live securely, and that through the affection and loyaltie of that good people. Not one word of sence in the whole sentence. First, no ill counsell for the King to be long and farre absent from his Parliament. Strange in the Proposition, that the king should not be where he is bound to be, and no wayes without sicknesse excused; and after a Jurie of twelve Parliament men have sitten upon it, it is resolved by both Houses to bring the king nearer his Parliament, a serious parley is to be held, and the learned in the estates of mens bodies consulted withall, the Estates must be satisfied of the Kings removall, and if any possibilitie with the preservation of his life may draw him nearer them, by no meanes he may withdraw further off. But the strange proposition may have a strong reason to do it, and what reason can be against, causa sola, on the Kings part, who hath nothing but sicknesse to alledge for himselfe; for in warre in forraine parts, his Parliament excuseth him, if he make it with their consent; otherwise he is guiltie, and his Parliament may forsake him, and forbid his Subjects to follow him. But lets heare his Counsellors reason, Because at London, he, and his Lovers, were in danger to be torne in pieces every day. This is the first part of the reason, and the second is like it, at Yorke no such thing, but more then securitie for all subjects that meant to be loyall. We have the reason by the end, and to begin with him we cannot love except we forsake London. How did London teare him in pieces the next day after the tumult, surely the torment was in his eares with prayers and supplications; and since his going from them, and his eares have been closed up, and his eyes shut to see their miseries, they have gone to God to see their sorrows, and with teares and prayers begged for his return; and he that accuseth London to teare the King, teares him by his Counsell, and to save himself hath exposed him to all the danger he is in. Let all the world judge the safetie of Yorke, the whole Countie, and all places whither these kill Kings have carried him from his Counsell: and consider withall who are safe, but those onely the Parliament hath protected; and if the people would desert those the King protects, all the world should see of whom the King is in danger. But if he not onely out of his calling, but calling others from theirs, and keeping such from Justice as have not been faithfull in their callings, no marvell if the King from heaven and earth be not in danger; and whosoever kils him by the chance of battell, they shall be guiltie that have drawn him into it: and happie were he if he had eyes to see his first errour to depart from his Parliament, and persisting in it to embrue his whole kingdome in blood: And whiles the Doctor chargeth the two Houses with the warre, he dischargeth not his conscience to his King, nor deales truly with the kingdome to be their resolver in cases of Conscience as he does.

I have bidden the Doctor good night, and now salute him with a good day, and remember him of the burden of Dumah, Isa. 21. 11 placed between other two burthens of the Caldcan and Arabian, God not sparing the valley of vision, Isa. 22. 1. The Caldean is a burthen to Gods people, and they are the burthensome stone to all Nations, Zech. 12 3. lay them together, and consider who have the visions of God, and what they should do as the fruitfull valleys, Psal. 65. 13. be cloathed with increase: but alas the walls go down, and the mountains cry, Isa. 22. 5. Miserie begins where mercie is abused, 1. Pet. 4. 17. If with us God will be feared in his judgements, what end of evils will be with the Desert? Isa. 21. 1. A grievous vision is to them that have none, ver. 2. and the seer sorrows for them that will not see, ver. 3. and his heart is heavie at the hearing of the night, ver. 4. The senselesse prepare their tables. ver. 5. presume of their Watch-towers, eat and drinke, and suddenly the Alarme is given, Arise Princes, and anoint the shield. The full story is Dan. 5. Profane and profuse persons make merrie, and mourne too late. The Doctors last Section is to discharge himself of a scandalous assertion to charge the Parliament with hypocrisie, a language he either learned or taught in the Kings papers, where both Houses are termed Hypocrites, a faction of schismaticall, malignant, and ambitious persons. The Doctor answers, they are no charges upon a Parliament, but upon the chiefe contrivers of, and Actors in the resistance. Its well the hypocrisie is yet to be discovered by him that knows the hearts of all men, to their amazement that in time shall heare it, or feele it. Charitie binds no conscience to contradictions, or against sense, or from being a Judge betweene the King and his Counsell, the rules being given by him in the end of his former Treatise. It was too much for the King to say, He was not bound to renounce his own understanding, or contradict his own Conscience for any Counsellours sake whatsoever; which is most true where he is a competent Judge, as he is not of any Court in the kingdome, for he may not reverse the judgement given by it by his own; and now the Doctor with his King will be competent Judges of the Parliament, and the two Houses must be hypocrites if they judge them so to be, or lay down the rules for others to follow. Master Bridge saies the Parliament passeth no such sentence upon their Soveraigne, and the charge they lay upon his Counsellours is no other then David laid upon Sauls Counsellours, 1. Sam. 26. 19. The Doctor is glad of this, and claimes it for his King, who is driven out of his Parliament, and hunted up and down the Kingdome by Rebels. Now the Doctor speaks plainly of Armes, and if he will argue right in the cause, no armes are raised without the Parliament; but he saies the Parliament should have done, as David did, referred it to God. I say he speaks plainly, if the King command an army of men to destroy the kingdome, it may neither like David preserve it selfe, nor by the great Counsell be commanded to take up armes, because the King forbids it as Gods Minister; and I pray you how is he Gods Minister by St. Paul, but either as from the efficient, or the end. He is the minister of God to thee for good. Will you have any more in those words, then the author, end, and object. The Author is God, the end good, the object man. How farre will you bind the subject from God or the end? He is not for good, but destruction, and is the subject bound to his own destruction? Or to beleeve God gives him a minister for his mischief? When a King is Gods Minister, God is his Law-giver, and his power is not mastership, but service. When men are his Law-givers, he is not their Judge, but must judge with them; and what he doth without them, is void in Law; for he is both from God and man their Minister, and a Law-giver to neither, as I shall shew him.

I would seeke the Doctor downe to the Bishops, and the Kings Oath is in my way, which binds him not to protect them from a repeal, no more then it doth of any other Statute: but they have the approbation of the Catholique Church, and I find some using Isa. 21. 5. Prepare a table, that is, for Bishops, and very just they should have it as Watchmen: but the Tower sets them in eminent places, and some have counted them, Isa. 33. 18. and where are they? certainly if their places be of God, then Paul will speak for them out of the text, 1. Cor. 1. 20. and fools they shall be that will be wiser then God. Your continuation of Bishops since the plantation hath had as many over-turnes, as is in Ezekiels vision, Chap. 21. 27. till the Government come to strangers. And if the Doctor will give me leave to direct him in both, I shall tell him it is time for Shiloh to come the second time, for the Bishops are as much degenerated in the keyes of the Church, as ever the Jews were in the Scepter, Gen. 49. 10. Shiloh is the Messias, and one of his first names, and it comes of Shelah, the peace-maker, and the Masorites might have pointed it Shelah, the name of the first sonne of Judah that survived, and signifies peaceable; Er and Onan perishing. Gen. 46. 12. The Patriarch Jacob might by the direction of the holy Ghost chuse his name before any other, as the Saviour of the destroyed. For that of the secundine is more ambiguous, and lesse probable. The word Scepter is a rod or staffe, which is not a King, but a State or power of Government, having jurisdiction till it vanish. Judah was not a continued kingdom for more then two thirds of the kingly royalty in that Tribe; namely, not till David, nor after Zedekiah, saving that of the Maccabus, and of Herod, who were kings, and that not above tighty yeers and yet were they never without Rulers, and I say it the more to satisse the Doctor in his fancie of kings, as if they were the most naturall Governors. Judas Maccabeus after the Kings and Dukes had the conduct of the Jews. He seeks to Rome for their friendship, and Demetrius challengeth them for Subjects, and so they are not helped by the Romanes, and their Generall is slain by Demetrius. His Brother Jonathas succeeds him, and then his Brother Simon. After him rules Hyrcanus his sonne, and then Aristobulus changing the Government, assumes the Diademe and becomes their king for one yeer, and dying his brother Alexander reignt 26. yeers, and makes Hyrcanus his eldest sonne high Priest, and leaves Alexandra his wife Queene; and when she dies the Romane Senate deposeth the high Priest, and placeth Aristobulus his brother in his place. Antipater and Edomite opposeth Aristobulus; and because Hyrcanus his brother was pleased with his peace he prevailed not; yet not desisting he dealt with the king of Arabia to invade Judea, who entring, forced Aristobulus to flie to Jerusalem, and Easter coming, the besieged beg Beasts for Sacrifices, and their Enemies having received their moneys, break their promises, and the Brothers unite, and send Messengers to Scaurus in Syria, Pompeyes Legate, who receives their money, and removes Aretas the Arabian king, and confirmes Aristobulus in his Principalitie who is poysoned, and Alexander his sonne is accused by the Romanes, and by Pompey a few moneths after his father is beheaded, and then Antipater the Father of Herod when he had re-edified the walls of Jerusalem, finding Hyrcanus stupid and dull deposeth him of his Ethnarchie, and gives it to his eldest sonne: and Herod having taken Ezechias a notorious thiefe with his companions robbing in Syria, punisheth them, and for it is accused at Jerusalem, and cited to the Synedrion.

Sextus Cæsar writes for him, and Hyrcanus frees him: but Herod being in great favour with Cæsar raiseth an Armie to revenge the injurie; but Antipater his Father and Phaselus his elder Brother stay him. Afterward Herod goes to Rome, and by the help of Antoney obtaines of the Senate the name of a king; yet neither in the Levites nor the Edomites ceased the Rulers, but they had still some of their own: And so we come to the next word, Law-giver, which signifies not onely a Law-maker, but qui jus dixit, one that useth jurisdiction. As for the last words, from betweene his feet, meanes his posteritie, by a modest expression of the place of generation. And the very heathen observed it in Bacchus borne ex femore Jovis, which is no more then Jupiters sonne, though in ignorance the Greeks made it a fable. Now mark to whom the people are gathered, the Jews being rejected, to Christ. So this prediction was fulfilled when Titus destroyed the Citie, and then ceased all their rule: not first when the Romanes subdued them, nor under Herod, nor his sonne Archelaus, when Christ was borne, but the Nations gathered unto him, and our Saviours Scepter set up amongst them; and so Matthew gives this as the last signe, that their end should be, when the Gospel was preached to all Nations. Some policie they had as we have, and the Doctor thinks it is the same we had at the first, which he may as easily perswade, as at the destruction of Jerusalem the Government was Gods, and not to be repealed by the Parliament. I make no question what is divinely established that Counsell will never reject, but if corruptions be crept into Divine orders, good reason that Court should carefully correct them, which is not to teare up all by the roots, but take away the wild branches which will suck from the tree the whole sap, and suffer no good fruit to grow. What is best is not for the Doctor to determine, and defend the kings armie in any thing against both Houses; and I shall give him a good reason from our discourse of a Law-giver, which cannot from the creation be conceived ever to be allowed amongst the people of God to any one man, or all men in any Counsell, but to God alone in the sense of making Laws; for the Morall, Judiciall, and Ceremoniall Laws, were all of God, and the Jurisdiction that any had from God, was jus dicere, to administer under God, and so do all Magistrates: and Paul saies they are Ministers for no other end but to do justice, and his whole discourse is of that, and subjection to just commands, and the fifth booke the Doctor never saw, hath set him a long lesson to learne in all the texts of Scripture to warrant what he hath said for a tyrant, and let him know the Thearchies of the Scripture quite overthrow the jurisdiction of the King in his sense: and if he come to the second, where men have legislative power to rule by the Edict of one man, or the verdict of many, let him take which he will, whether the King is to rule us by his personall Edict, or the verdict of his wise men? He cannot say the legislative power is in Edicts, and the jurisdiction of the King is jus dicere, not to make it what he will, but to proclaime it from others, not against his Councell, but from it; and if they passe not the verdict, his wisedome may not presume any power is in him to contradict them, as they may contradict him.

Its well known de facto, that no grant of the King is good, he can neither make an Executor nor Administratour of his Will, as owners do that have a proprietie in their lands and goods. Whose is the Land, 2. Sam. 3. 12. not the Kings to dispose of it as he list, nor any goods of the Crowne. He hath an Heire, but he can give him nothing by succession; for succession of Kings is no other then a continued election: and though the people have bound themselves to the Heire, yet it is by promise no patrimonie from his Father, but the kingdomes trust from the people. And if the Doctor will not acknowledge this, he destroyes the whole contrivement of States, and forme of Government; for conquest is tyranny, and the Doctors reason for translation of kingdomes, as one of Gods meanes argues not alwayes justice in the doer. The example of David, 2. Sam. 12. is not to purpose, for David did it justly. First, because the old grudge was just when Israel came out of Ægypt, that they would not relieve them in the wildernesse. Secondly, they had violated the Law of Nations, in abusing Davids Messengers. Thirdly, they had taken occasion by the slaughter of Uriah, and others to blaspheme God. Fourthly, they had disturbed all the Nations round about stirring them up, and hiring them to joyne with them against David, 2. Sam. 10. 6. Fifthly, they were most cruell and vile Idolaters, sacrificing their own children to their abominable Idol Molech, therefore they were worthily punished to passe through fire, and be put under sawes, harrows, and axes. The Kings Plunderers plow as deep furrows upon the backs of this Nation, as if the people had deserved the like punishment with the Ammonites, which David by conquest without a cause compelled not to serve him. The Edomites deserved the same, and Dominion was not as the Doctor saies a just claime for any that could master another. He addes as idly the descent of kingdomes, as if that were all the right, which indeed is none without a successive election; and when the Doctor hath done all he can, he must be brought to a divine or humane power above all kings, who are but Ministers of justice, and may not meddle to make Laws for God or man. God is sufficient for his Church and people, and by him Christians have learned to rule, and referre all to the Eldership, and as worthy Hooker hath it in his Preface to his Policie, that he that will not submit to a supreme Senate, or generall Synod, meanes to follow no judgement but his own. So I will say of the Doctor, and all Royalists, as the Apostle does, Rom. 3. 17. The way of peace they have not known, and therefore I joyne it with the precedent and consequent verses. Their throats are sepulchres to devoure. Their tongues are deceitfull, their lips speak poysoned words, and they fill their mouthes with curses and bitternesse. Their feet are swift to shed blood. Their wayes are nothing but miserie and destruction, and there is no fear of God before their eyes.

Hear, O heavens, and judge upon whom the guilt will lie. The King would continue the Episcopall Government according to a forged Oath, and law of his own. Must the Bishops be pardoned and protected because they have made him sweare it against Laws, take up Armes for them by his own will, and no force of Armes to repell, or repeal his personall acts? And how dispute the Malignants, the Parliament may make, revive, repeale, &c. no new Laws without personall consent; therefore they may ordain, restrain, repell, repeal, or revive no necessaries provisions of preservation for themselves and the kingdom. The Question is not now of a full legislative power to do all things that may bind at all times: but what binds for the present, and the necessitie of the time. All men know whatsoever is done by the King in the administration of justice, is to be questioned by both Houses, but no king can question them, nor never did; and seeing this Doctor will divide them, let it be so in his notion, and so much confessed that nothing can be done de jure, I meane to make, repeal, or revive Laws: yet de facto some thing must be done for the present necessitie. Nothing by the King, for in him is not the power to determine what shall be done, and it he do, it is out of his jurisdiction, and the Law saies he that obeyes any command out of its proper jurisdiction shall be punished. The Kings ordinarie jurisdiction will not reach the Question, his extraordinarie cannot be from himselfe, for then he might do all things without a Parliament: but he is bound to call it when dangers and difficulties require it, and the Law is what he cannot denie both Houses when they are called, and deale with Bils to be granted by the King, and errours he hath nothing to do with all for judgement, or punishment. The best of the Kings Judges may erre, and do wrong by witnesses, or weaknesse in themselves, and the Subject suffers and can have no remedie, but in Parliament by reason the King favours a Courtier in the injurie of a Countrey-man. This poore man complains where common compassion is, and is comforted, the King informed against him, and displeased, saies such fellows have been factious, the complaint of Bishops; seditious the complaint of Courtiers, ill members the cry of Malignants, and these men can cry unto none but God, till his immediate Law-givers heare it; having heard it, they reverse any judgement, Civill or Ecclesiasticall, that is not meerly spirituall, and referred to the keyes. They know as they have no power to excommunicate, so they undertake no mans absolution: yet the judgement of injustice executed in any Court, they can call it before them; and in a word, all erronious judgements, Royall Pattents, illegall impositions, tyrannous exactions, the removall and repressing of all publique grievances, the redressing of all wrongs, censuring Delinquents, declaring Law, punishing their own Members, &c. The Common Law and Statutes denie the King a Negative vote, to delay by his Great or Privie Seale for any moment of time any legall proceeding. Reverse, recall, controull, countermand any judgement, resolution, determination or sentence of his Judges, either by word of mouth, Proclamation, or any denunciation whatsoever.

Doctors of Divinitie would teach conscience conviction against Law and reason, as if the high Court of Parliament were more in subjection to the King, then Court Baron, or petty Sessions; and I wonder whence they fetch this wisedome, more to bind the two Houses to beat the will of the King, then other Benches, Common-Pleas, Chancery, &c. But surely to flatter the King to be free where he is most bound, to succour them where they ought most to suffer; for our Arch-prelate in his pride made Judges quake for their own quiet, and to be questioned, never dreamed whiles their dread Soveraigne was their Sanctuarie; but Hell is not more horrour to them, then the two Honourable Houses. Againe for Bills of Grace the Bishops raised themselves when the kingdome was theirs, which for the Church had almost swallowed it up, and what they hold in Commendants, Impropriations, Revenues, mens purses, divine powers, they would perswade all men of divine right that they need to do no right to any bodie, but their own bellies, that they plead for more then God: yet Bills of Grace preferred by both Houses in private profits, priviledges, favours are not obligatory merited, constrained, but freely granted when, where, and to whom the King will; but by these to say he is bound to none, and that they are of his bountie, goodnesse, grace, and meer good will is challenged by Chaplains to cheare up their hopes the King will never hurt them, but hold all Laws from the Parliament to passe against them; which he cannot do without a negative voice to wrong all men, as they have done in their prelaticall pride. Notwithstanding Bils of common right and justice to pull down their Lordships in the Lambes Hornes, Revel. 13. 7. and make them Lambe-like in the keyes, and rightly ruled about the throne of Christ, Revel. 4. 4. in the Crownes and thrones is not yet reduced to primitive purenesse, and farre from ancient order applauded by the Doctor in his last Section, and though our judgement passe not by the new Bridge, yet we cannot forsake our way with him to accuse them of the most of our miseries, or say with the Doctor, Heare, O Heavens, the guilt upon whom it lies, that the King cannot countenance or continue the Episcopall tyranny against the whole kingdome to beare the yoke and burthen of Bishops, as our times have had it; no nor yet the King and his people if the Oaths they have made of late be examined. But to let that passe, which pincheth the Doctor in his hopes to be a Bishop, which I could wish he were in his own words, of ancient and primitive times, for he is no more in love with it, then I professe my selfe to be, but cannot teach the King the libertie of his Vote to denie common Justice, and be a Tyrant. I wish him to be as he is an happie King to vote where he is bound, and not stand upon any greater power then the freedome of his own will from a right judgement, and no violent externall force to compell as free as himselfe to obey him. Such Bils are the preservation of publique peace and safetie, liberties, properties, priviledges of all subjects, the prevention, ablation, punition of all causes that cause publique or private grievances, mischiefs, wrongs, offences, frauds; the redresse of all defects or inconveniences of the Common Law, the advancing and regulating of all trades, the speedie execution of justice, the reformation of Church-men and Church abuses, their religion of Popery, Arminianisme, Ceremonie, unsound preaching, and unfitnesse to be either in the Church, or a Synode to reforme it: for if the King do it by a Convocation then most of the Offendors shall be their own Judges, against the ancient Canons and Constitutions. Let Catiline judge betweene the Senate and himself, and Tully shall be judged a Rebell, stand he never so much for the libertie of Citie and Countrey, and Catiline shall be a good Citizen, and worthy to rule the Empire with his companions. The Councell at Tyre condemned Athanasius, and 46. Bishops branded it with Eusebius and Theogius his enemies, saying, Lex Dei inimicum neq; testem, n que Judicem esse vult, God allows no man being an enemie to be witnesse or Judge of another. Athan. Apolog. 2 non arbitramur, pag. 216. Chrysostome excepts against Theophilus, Quod contra omnes Canones & Leges, &c. that against all rule and Law, he had called him into judgement, before he had answered his own crimes, Ipse reus est inimi us & kostis: He himselfe is guiltie, our adversarie and open enemie, Chrysost. ad Innocent, Papam, Epist. To. 1. Concil. post Epist. Jun. 27. Pope Nicholas the first, and Celestine the third, say, Quia suspecti & inimies, Judices esse non &illegible; &c. Common reason doth teach, that those who are ones enemies, should not be their Judges, Epist. 8. Nich. 1. Extr. de Appel. cap. 2. ipsi ratio dictat, &c. If the gravitie and integritie of the Imperiall presidents in the Councell of Chalcedon had not checked the temeritie and insolencie of the Popes Legates, it had been worse then the Ephesine Latrocinie.

In the Councell causes were heard and examined as they ought both for the accuser, and the accused, Dioscorus being set as Judge after Leo’s Legates, had lashed out with rebuke, saying, Either let Dioscorus go out, or we will depart. The Judges told them gravely, If you will be Judges, you must not prosecute as accusers. Then after passion speaking reason, Non patimur ut iste sedeat, qui judicandus advenit: Dioscorus comes to be judged, and may not judge in his own cause. An equall motion say the glorious Judges, and so Dioscorus is removed from the Bench of Bishops and placed inter reos, in the place of those who were to be judged. The religion Emperour in the second Ephesine Synod said, if Theodoret be questioned, let the Synod assemble, and iudge without him. The like he commanded concerning Flavianus, who justly judged Entiches, yet to avoid all errour, referred the accusation to &illegible; higher Councell that should have been generall above that at Constantinople, Flavianus orthodoxall, and Dioscorus an Entichian are both justly tried without their owne judgement in a most just equall, and upright Councell. Another example we have in this holy Synod well ordered by secular Judges, concerning Athanasius Bishop of Paros deposed by Domuus in a Provinciall Councell after three citations, refusing to come, and Sabianus set in his roome. Athanasius complaines in the Councell of Chalcedon, and hath nothing to say against his triall at Antioch, but that Domuus the chiefe Judge was his Enemie, and these goodly Judges presently order that Maximus Bishop of Antioch by a second Synod held with him should examine the matter, and if it proved that Domuus had done injustice as an enemie, that Sabianus should remaine substitute to Athanasius, and he be restored to his See. Thus ordered the secular Judges, and the sacred cried, Nihil iustius, Nothing more equall. I have said this that the Doctor might understand his primitive times, and the secular Judges disposed in Councels of good order, and that the Parliament meddles not too farre, the King being corrupted with his Bishops, and drawn by them into an obstinate errour to loose all before he will leave them, for so saies the Doctor in his last Section, that the King will continue their Government according to Law and Oath; and that the guilt must lie upon them that by Armes would force him from it. Its plaine the Doctor makes the Episcopacie the bloodie quarrell, and the Parliament hath found them guiltie of this ill counsell, and for Law cannot stand by the Kings pleasure, if divine they need not the Kings protection; the Parliament will not punish them for their calling, the matter in question is fact, of forgery for the Kings Oath to protect and pardon them plotting against the Parliament ever since King James came to the Crown, who began his Reigne with a false Oath, and ended it with the repeale of the Militia, which two things are now, de facto, the quarrell, whether the Bishops shall be pardoned, and protected in all their evils, and the King by a Militia of his own defend them and Papists against the Parliament. The Doctor is not so well read as to answer the justice of the cause. The King, may be, would call a Convocation, and then the Bishops shall be their own Judges. The Parliament, as the case standeth, thinks upon a more just Synod, qualified with a lawfull calling, which they will commit to the King, not in the Popish way of a Convocation, but a free Election of all it concernes, and that of orthodox Divines; which three conditions when they are rightly known, the King shall call, the people chuse, and orthodoxe Divines with the Brethren conclude it.

We know Commons were called at the first by common consent, and consisted of Pastours and people, and the chiefe Elders for order preceded in the Convocation, and the Pastours disputed, and by the holy Scriptures defined, and subscribed first, saying, I so defining and consenting subscribe, or vote, the people passed their sentence and said, I consenting subscribe or vote; and so what seemed good to the Elders and Brethren was sent to the Churches, and by pacificall subscriptions gave their consent, as if they had been present; and before Councels the Church had an excellent way of conference and confirmation of their faith, not much unlike that, Galat. 2. 2. Such presence could not be alwayes, and therefore the universall way was by letters, as the learned know, called, Letters of conference, and they were for this end as Authors say, ad exponendam sidem, and at length the Bishops being the great men sent one to another for the Pall, which is no other but sealed letters to signifie how the Church prospered in all places; and Patriarkes being the greatest men did it in behalfe of all the Churches and the Church of Rome being the seat of the Emperour was of greatest note, and so esteemed in the first generall Councell, which set it before the Church of Alexandria, and Antioch, which are onely mentioned in the Councell of Nice; and the next generall Councell addes a fourth Patriarke, and sets him next the Pope, which made Rome in pride denie that Councell, as Leo did the fourth, when the fifth came in I am not certain, I leave it to the Doctor to tell me; and tell him how the Pope did change fidem exponere, into fidem dare, for mutuall and Christian exposition of faith, into swearing and obligation, as our Bishops have dealt with us to bridle us as horses and mules without understanding to be ruled by the reason of our riders, and since we began to kick have tamed with oaths, and made themselves odious to all men to dispise them for the most unfavorie salt in the kingdome, good for nothing but the dunghill, and that which is worst they have made the Salt-peter that blows us up, if God be not mercifull to our King in the directive part to a Councell, to second it with a coactive power from his Councell to save us. The essentiall Decrees of Synods have been before Senates seconded them, and so the civill Magistrates power is but Accidentall to the Church, yet so necessarie that God in time added it to take away persecution; and yet the Bishops have used it since the ten hornes submitted to their two, that they have hurt more then the Dragon. Its therefore high time for his Majestie to awake, and consider with his Parliament the perils, Papists and Bishops have brought us into. His Majestie is made beleeve his Congr de’sliers for Bishops and all great Officers are such prerogatives as have ever gone with the person of the King, and yet nothing better known then that the Clergie and people have chosen their Bishops, and so much at this day is intimated in that instrument, and elect Privy Counsellours, State Officers, and Judges have been nominated by the Parliament, and yet without prejudice to any priviledge the King can challenge. We are all agreed of the three properties of a Synod, that Princes may call them, the people elect the Members; for if their Laws bind all, then fit all should have an hand in them; and if the multitude mistake in the Members, its free for any man to accuse Sectary or Heretique, and he is to be no Judge till he have cleared himself from all crime. The Doctor is cleare in his last Section for this assertion, that Princes in their necessarie defence may entertaine such as they would not, nay, ought not by Law, as Papists disarmed by Parliament may by him be armed against it, and not onely so but our Religion, for he is mad that will think they will fight for it. Ziba sales nothing to the point, and the Doctor lesse, when he speaks of the duty and service of Subjects, for can any man that serves the King against Law, serve as a Subject, or a Rebell? And may Kings commands his Subjects to rebell against his Laws, because they rebell not against him? Good Divinitie not onely to oppose the King and his Laws, but set him against God; for whiles he gives his power to the Beast, Rev. 17. 14. he makes war with the Lambe, better the Doctor taught him to hate the whore, v. 16.

What he saies of just authoritie to bear Arms, argues his wilfull ignorance, for can any man be armed justly against Law? His List of the Army against the King, of Papists or as bad, must make him blush; for who allows them to fight for us that are such as God hath taxed, 2. Chron. 19. 2. The ungodly are just such Idolaters as Papists are; for some worship not the true God at all, as the Nations that succeeded the ten Tribes. Some the true God alone, but in calves, as Jeroboam. Some the true God and Baal, as Ahab. Some bring with them their false gods, and for fear are forced to regard the true God; yet as Topicall, which was the sinne of all Idolaters to the captivitie, and some think to have been the infirmitie of Jonah in his flight to Tarshish, but God meets him with another lesson, Chap. 1. 9. and then he sees a larger Lord then ever he dreamed of before, and confesseth himselfe an Idolater, in observing lying vanities, which all do that forsake better mercies, Chap. 2. 8. Papists serve the true God as Ahab did, but they have their Idols with Jeroboam, and dead men and Angels with wicked Jezabel mentioned, Rev. 2. 20. And now may the Doctor be ashamed of his Papists as the ungodly, which was should neither help, or be helped by them, and to love them that hate God, sheweth our Religion to be suspected, or some affinitie that makes us fall, and a better Seer God send the King. The Arch-Angel to the Arch-Accuser, the Lord rebuke thee, may admonish the Doctor his mouth his blacker then it should be, and for a giddie age he wrongs himselfe that he sees not the gad-flee sting him to fling up his taile, and after brushing with the swip runnes as fast as the rest. The Papists may not applaud themselves in the Doctor, nor yet the Parliament. The King is put to it, to admit the Papists for his helpers, and the Parliament is the cause. Say not againe, The Lord rebuke thee, for so he does what you make just and reasonable for the King. Good Subjects may be used by the King, but Papists are good subjects; therefore the King may use them. Good Subjects transgresse not the Laws, Arme not without authoritie, oppose not the Parliament, set not one part against another, gain-say not the Parliament that cannot be dissolved, nor study to dissolve it by Armes, nor provoke the King to do it by his authoritie, which the Doctor saies is sufficient to direct any mans conscience to be satisfied, and he hath resolved it so to do, and by it may judge what a Resolver he is. The tradition of reserved power to resist, dispense with oaths, transcends the art of Jesuites in the cunning of lies and forgeries; and I bequeath the whet-stone to the Doctor that pretends Religion to a good conscience, and convinceth it with an implicite faith to be subject to the King, when he commands contrary to Law, and yet may do it by his authoritie, and the Parliament as he hath left it hath no power to maintain the Laws, to discerne them by it, to arme men to do it: but they may do neither, because the King commands the contrary. Master Burrows that began the businesse with the Doctor, must end it with his Lord of Hosts. Of the Doctors collection I will say nothing, of his conclusion he shall have enough. The Doctor puts the case how conscience can be perswaded of his intentions, or its own resolution to take up armes against him. Mr. Burrows bids him state the Question right, and not hide his falshood from the people. The sufficient cause for a people to take up Armes is the defence of themselves against ruine. The Doctor will not so admit it, except it be against the King. What is this to the purpose, but to passe away in a shadow to his own shame. He saies the King is bound by his Oath to protect his Subjects against those that seek their ruine, and can he do this without the Sword? But you will have it in your own hands against bad Counsellours, as was done in the end of the Queens time, and declared to be against her, as being without her authoritie, by the meere motion of private men.

The Doctor saies in this point the Parliament helps not, for that’s not the point. What is it then? He saies we may see it in this, our Armes are against the King, if without him we take up Armes under any pretence whatsoever. The Parliaments power and authoritie is nothing without the King; and what is the Kings without theirs? The Doctor saies the Sword is his to use without them, and all Papists may arme if he bid them, though Law forbids them, this is expresse, and may not the Parliament take up Armes to disarme them that arme against Law? Now speak Doctor, what Law forbids? The will of the King? then that’s authoritie enough against the Parliament. The King denies to deliver us from the danger of armed Papists and Malignants, and that’s cause enough for people and Parliament to satisfie their consciences they may take up Armes to protect themselves. To this the Doctor saies, he did it not till people and Parliament put themselves out of his protection: God blesse us, if the King may thus be pleaded for The people petition the Parliament to be protected by some Militia, King James in his last Parliament having repealed all Laws made for it, and there might be reason for the Lords and Commons to consent unto it, and their present peace not urge them to a present remedie, but Commissions appointed by the King and his Privy Councell made the people groan under the Burthen; and this Parliament prayed they might be restored to their ancient liberties, and have things done for warre by common consent as formerly. Besides dangers were great, and to prevent them the King by ill counsell produced them, as with Scotland, by the Bishops to disturbe them in their Government, and settle their own tyranny amongst them, which the Scots resisted, and the English were forced to an Army by the meere pleasure of the King and his Bishops. The Scots gained their end, and were discharged as good Subjects, and shewed it by disbanding as soone as they were satisfied in their right, to continue in their ancient liberties. This happie peace was made by the Parliament, which now with the King cannot make the peoples peace, except he may have the power, as the Doctor teacheth to do what he will; for he hath denied them the Militia, and made it his own, and armes whom he will against Law, and by arms protects Delinquents, and they bid battell to his people, calling them Rebels, because they will not do as the Papists do take up Armes against Law, but by it arme against them that do. A pettie Constable may arme any Towne to resist a Riot, and he that will not assist, shall be foundly punished for it. The Sheriffe of the shire may raise the Countie to take Felons, and destroy Rebels, and all this by the Law, though the King should command the contrary; and shall the Parliament be prevented by a frivolous Doctor to withstand Armies raised against Law, and made to be Law, because the King commands against it? Once more good night blind Doctor, God send thee a better morning, and so I return to the Prophet again, and his foure Burthens. The valley of vision, the Church of God suffers, and it is by the Caldean, and shall he escape? Mark Doctor in hope of the morning, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, and all the graven Images of her gods are broken down to the ground, Isa. 21. 9. O my threshing, and the corn of my stoore, v. 10. Thrash clean for God and send away all the Romane chaffe out of our kingdome; and if the Edomites will heare. I will tell them of their morning and mirth, ver. 12. Rev. 11. 10. but of the night also. v. 13.

&illegible; rejoycing shall be the Cities ruine, and that tenth part that stands shall fall; and if any fear the judgement, let me direct him to three duties. First, inquisition, enquire for the good way. Secondly, conversion, return from errour. Thirdly, accession, and come to the Lord. Thine heart shall meditate terrour, Isa. 33. 18. Such is our time, and such must be our teaching. The terrour is warre, the meditation prayer, the fountain a good heart, and that’s in a good man, and this good man I take to be Hezekiah terrified with Sennacherib, and comforted by God, the feare of the Lord is his treasure, yet 6. A noise of a tumult shall be to the wicked when God lifts up his hand, v. 3. His Enemies suffered as caterpillars shall eat up all and fall themselves and perish &illegible; &illegible; The locusts shall leap in after them, and &illegible; to and fro &illegible; they be taken, &illegible; 4. First, they run in upon Sennacherib, and spoile him as he spoiled others, and the Caldæans come to their end, and so shall all enemies, that have the receivers of other mens goods, and Scribes to take their names they meane to spoyle, and he that counts the Towers for his own shall go without them; and St. Paul makes the generall use, that God makes foolish the wisedome of this world, 1. Cor. 1. 20. O thou sword of the Lord, how long will it be ere thou be quiet? Put up thy selfe into thy scabbard, rest and be still. How can it be quiet, seeing the Lord hath given a charge against Ashkelon, and against the Sea shore? there hath he protested it. Jer. 47. 6, 7. Pharaoh give the Philistines a faire warning, and the Caldean makes an end of both, and Judah for trusting in Pharaoh is punished with him; and the Philistines for rejoycing at Sions sorrows, suffers by the same hand; and the sword is the Lords, whosoever lift it up, yet flesh and blood, saies, How long Lord shall it be, and determines without the text. It cannot be quiet, as long as God chargeth it, and as the last words shews it, sweares the sword not to returne emptie till as a Judge it hath gone the full circuit: and the cause with us is laid down, Levit. 26. 25. Revel. 6. 2, 3, 4. the white horse comes to fetch &illegible; in to Jesus Christ, and that red Horse follows to revenge our disobedience; and if the report be true, our bloody battell at Edge-Hill sheweth our blasphemie, and may well for this be called, the valley of the red Horse, and if any Records have named it so before, the thing deserves the more to be noted. And now I have done with the Doctor, onely I must tell him of one Booke more then the rest, bearing the title of Scripture and reason pleaded for Defensive Armes. It is against him as well as the rest, and more fully then any other, stating the Question so as we may see both the negative and affirmative. The negative by the Doctor, the affirmative by learned Divines; and the Doctor is much too blame, to think the people are led by blind guides.

He shall find this book to deale truly with the texts, which he takes clearly from the Doctor, and I think they that follow him mightily blind that conceive so well of the Doctor, as to think he hath sufficiently satisfied their consciences, when he hath lost the foundation of all his labour; and to speak plainly the Resolver of conscience is not cleare in his own, for he trembles to leave the King out of all his discourse, and so states the Question, Whether if the King will not discharge his trust, but is bent or seduced to subvert Religion, Laws, and liberties, Subjects may take up Armes and resist. This last book I have seene takes the first word King, and in it containes the full power of a kingdome, co-ordinate or subordinate. Co-ordinate as the Parliament, and this is not onely supreme, but vertually the whole power, and Gods ordinance, and to it subjection is due by every person, not one excepted, and if that be the duty, then resistance is the sinne, which three things must be adequate and reciprocall. The power being of God must be legall, which no tyranny is, and therefore not of God; and that which is not of God, is not to be obeyed either actively or passively. Now if power and subjection be equall, then my obedience cannot be of God to that power which is not of God. When the Doctor hath proved tyrannie to be of God, then he hath proved to the conscience that it must be obeyed. Resistance is the sinne, and being opposite to subjection, is no sinne where subjection is not required; and subjection is not required, where Gods ordinance is not. And therefore suppose the power of a Parliament to be tyranny, the text enjoynes me no subjection unto it, and then to resist it is no sinne. I confesse the Co-ordinatour saies the contrary, but both overthrow the Doctor, and the Divines in the last book must be limited to judgement in the meanes against rash attempts in resistance, for Resistance not legall may be against legall power, and then it is not the subversion of Religion, Laws, liberties, but their establishment, and the opposition is flat rebellion. A subordinate power sets the King for the supreme, yet the other powers joyned with it, are higher also in relation to the people, though inferiour to the supreme, and the Apostle meanes both alike as powers ordained of God, and subjection alike as duty to all, and resistance will be the same sinne to the Officer that is to the King. All the care is in resistance that the King be safe, and for the rest it seemes by the Doctor all men may knock them on the head, and starve them. The Doctor will be hard driven by this consideration. The King is supreme, all his Officers subordinate. The King commands them to kill his Subjects for serving of God, obeying the Laws, defending their liberties, and these as murtherers, theeves, cut-throats, &c. come upon them, what shall they do? resist, or stand like sheepe till such wolves devoure them all? If he say, let the King be in securitie, and then no matter if such rogues perish, for they are not Officers of State, but offendours as Rebels and Traytors, and ought by the Laws of the kingdome to die. If the Doctor grant this, all is granted, that tyrannie may be resisted: and the King to secure all his people saies enough, if he would suffer it to be done. The power which is legally placed in both Houses, is more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of tyranny. This would be as the Laws are the Kings and kingdomes securitie, for the fifth booke against the Doctor saies well, Kings have seldome or never been murthered or deposed, where Laws have been preserved in their vigour: but violences are vain helps, and Papists pacified by sparing, spare not when Laws are sharpened against them. Judicia committuntur injustis Leges ex legibus, pax discordantibus, Justitia injuriosis, &c. Matthew Paris, Hist. Angl. 371. When the lawlesse give us laws we loose all, and our lives are to the Kings Souldiers no more then Turks. Seneca de Clem. lib. 1. ca. 24. gives Princes the best precept, Remissius imperanti melius paretur, & non minus principi turpia sunt multa supplicia, quam medico multa funera. But we were happy dead, then live as they that desired it, and yet had death flee from them, Revel. 9. 5. 6.

THE RESPONDENT DOCTOR, AND HIS OPPONENT ADVERSARIES.

THere is a terrible Commination, Jer. 13. 12, 13, 14. arising from Wine in every bottle, till it burst or breake, and it begins with the King, then the Priests and Prophets, and lastly the people, and in their drunkennesse they dash one upon another. Fathers and children, and the proud will not heare, nor give him glory that calls for it, and he causeth darknesse, that they may stumble upon the very mountains of their pride, and where they look for light, the shadow of death is upon them, and they perish in grosse darknesse, Say unto the King, and to the Queene, humble your selves, for your principalities, and even the crowne of your glory shall come down. Beware of being accustomed to evill, ver. 23. for the skin changeth not, neither will the spots alter that are naturall. Our Nationall sinnes are many, and Divines are the most dangerous, and like the steele and the flint wast themselves to strike fire, which is the onely issue of contentious wits. The Dragon sucks the Elephants bloud, and is killed with his fall, Morte cadunt subito per mutua vulnera fratres, wee call that civill which is most barbarous. The Turkes prayers are to God to keepe Christians at variance, and when one perswaded their Grandee from warre with the Germanes being many, he answered he feared them not, affirming his singers would sooner be all of one length, then their Princes of one mind. You shall finde six of us seemingly to be of six minds, and the Doctor is upon us all, as having listed himselfe for Cæsar, not knowing who he is. And being in the field in his Armes would have all men cast downe their weapons in conscience to his command, and by Gods word urgeth it, Rom. 13, 1, 2. A plaine case rightly stated, that all powers of God must be obeyed from the King to the Constable, when they are regular, and not crosse one to another, for God ordains no more contrary powers, then contrary beginnings, which made the Manichees hold a good and bad God, the one to begin evill and the other good: So the Doctor looking upon contrary powers, and loath to be a Manichee, makes them both of God, and so is very strong for obedience. God bids us resist the Devill, why should wee his power is of God? This must be a good argument, or powers must be resisted when they are not of God; but the Text sayes there is no power but of God. The first that ever writ against him was Master Burrowes, who distinguished rightly between the power, and the abuse of it. The Doctor claps both together, and sayes we must be subject to both, and the Scripture is silent in such a distinction, which is not true, Hes. 5. 11. that which God punisheth is no part of his will. But the Doctor will distinguish by the word willingly, and walking after the Commandement. This is meant of active obedience to sinne, but passively he may obey sinne. I wonder who taught him this distinction to obey sinne at all. The body is but a passive instrument to the soule, as the Serpent was to the Devill, and yet God spared neither, and as the body dyes the second death by the soule, so the soule dyes the first death by the body, and sinne casts them both from God. So then no subjection to sinne is warrantable. What then must it be to the punish of sinne? This is to suffer penaltie, and penaltie must be from the Law, and the Lawes of men are onely civill, and may concerne matters of Religion contained in the first Table, but the whole power of it is meerely in the Second Table, and as wee must by that give Cæsar his due, so by the other God requires what is due to him without mans inventions. Our Bishops have imposed many things upon weake consciences, and by a civill power have forced subjection, and many have denied them an active obedience, as having nothing to doe to charge upon them such a Religion, as Gods word allowes not: yet in respect of the civill Magistrate, and Law established, have made no resistance, but suffered the penaltie of the Law. But where there is no Law neither divine nor humane, but the meere will and pleasure of a man, and that against all Law, and the power that makes it in Parliament, to plead subjection, Master Burrowes hath beaten downe the Doctor, if never pen besides it had put hand to paper, but the fuller Answer hath handled him in another kinde, the Doctor never dreamed of in behalfe of the Parliament, and the Doctor is not ashamed of Alèquid, and secundum quid, where the truth is universall, for three Estates are co-ordènate ad omnia, and being once met the supreme power is in them all united not divided; for the Doctor is not well advised to make the two Houses two Estates, for so they were never constituted in this Kingdome, for such as the whole bodie is dispersed, so is it congregated, and wee say the Parliament, is totus populus, totum regnum, both before, in, and after the co-alition. Wee can make no more of it at any time in the matter, then the King, Lords, and common people, and they are so in the highest forme when they come together, and to speake of a Parliament otherwise then entire of three Estates, is but to æquivocate with words as Vertumnus Romanus does, and that which some call Protestant Religion; But wee speake without equivocation, the two Houses or a perfect Parliament, of three Estates, and the King cannot be out of them, and for his person and all the persons with him of either House, have not destroyed the co-ordination, which is such as to save the Kingdome they may doe any thing, and if they want any officers of the State necessary for use they may create them till his Majesty returne, and Mr. Bridges comes in with the co-ordinatour to an haire, onely they differ in the right which is easily reconciled, that selfe-preservation is naturall, & co-ordination nationall, and the fundamentall policie of this Kingdome, and both together make strongly for the peoples preservation, if the Doctor made them not blocks to beleeve him. As for the Deposer and the restrainer of a tyrant, they are not so contrary, but reason may reconcile them, for goe to the Law and nothing can be shewed to the contrary, and neither Aristotle nor any but the Divine have questioned the deposing of tyrants, & Popish Bishops and Barons have made no bones of it, though now for selfe-love they would be the best Protestats, but the present Parliamet hath best determined of it from the Kings own words that tyranny may be restrained, and I think the reverend and learned Divines that writ last by resistance meane no more, and both Houses have plainly peatested it that their thoughts were never to depose the King, and the whole kingdome may curse the Doctor for resolving conscience not to resist, and yet against all &illegible; powers hath resolved they may be resisted in subjection to a King, nay, to &illegible; and the King may curse him and all his ill Counsellers to draw him from his Parliament into so many dangers. Ad hoc corripit ut emendet, ad hoc emendet &illegible; serves: the Aloes that purge us with bitternesse, bring us to the breasts of the Lord Jesus to sweeten our sorrows. Justitiæ gladium oleo misericordiæ semper &illegible; God whets with oyle, and mingles mercie with justice; He makes the &illegible; to &illegible; with the mightie, Isa. 41. 14, 15. Souldiers we may be and Saints: &illegible; &illegible; nos vobiscum & militamus, & rusticamur, & mercamur, the best worthies in the world, can warre and plough, be Merchants and Mariners: yet mercifull men to mother Cities, as Joah was wished to be to Abel, 2. Sam. 20. 19, 20. He was a &illegible; Commander that told his Souldiers, when he payed for what he took, having taken the place by force, and his traine told him the money was lost, Sirs I do what in vigor, God put me not into this world to live upon rapine. To conclude, I shall commend a Divines saying to the Doctor. Legi possunt Scripturæ & tamen negligi, &illegible; not neglects of Gods blessed Book will satisfie conscience best; and I know more may still be said, and that God that is at hand moderate our minde with his truth, and send us peace in our miseries. Amev.

FINIS.

 


8.18. Anon., A Dialogue betwixt a Horse of Warre and a Mill-Horse (2 January, 1644)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., A Dialogue betwixt a Horse of Warre, and a Mill-Horse; Wherein the content and safety of an humble and painfull life, is preferred above all the Noyse, the Tumults, and Trophies of the Warre. Full of harmelesse Mirth, and variety. London, Printed by Bernard Alsop, and published according to order, 1643.

Estimated date of publication

2 January, 1644.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 303; Thomason E. 80. (5.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

A discourse between the Cavalliers Warre Horse, and the Country-mans Mill-Horse.

Cav. hors.

WEll met old Mill-Horse or indeed an Asse,

I must instruct thee before we doe passe

How to live bravely; look on me and view

My Bridle and my Saddle faire and new;

Warre doth exalt me, and by it I get

Honour, while that my picture is forth set

Cut out in Brasse, while on my back I beare

Some Noble Earle or valiant Cavallier.

Come therefore to the Wars, and doe not still

Subject thy selfe to beare Sacks to the Mill.

Mil-hors.

Despite me not thou Cavalliers War-Horse

For thouogh to live I take an idle course,

Yet for the common-wealth I alwayes stand,

And am imploy’d for it, though I’m nam’d

A Mill-Horse, I am free and seem not under

Malignants that doe townes and houses plunder.

Transported in thy back, while thou must be

Valse guilty of their wrong, and injurie.

Done to their country, while without just cause,

Thou fightest for the King against the Lawes.

Against Religion, Parliament and all,

And least the Pope and Bishops downe would fall.

Thou art erpos’d to battle, but no thanks,

Thou bast at all when thou dost break the Ranks

Of our stout Muskettiers, whose bullets flye

In showres, as in the fight at Newbery,

And force thee to retreat with wounds, or lame,

Is this the glory of thy halting same.

Whereof thou dost so bragge &illegible; beside thy fault

Of fighting for them who have alwayes fought,

Against the common-wealth, is such a sin,

That doth &illegible; closer to thee then thy skin,

What though upon my back I carry sacks;

Thy meat is plunderd out of barnes and stacks;

While thou dost seed on stolen Dates and Day

The wronged Farmers curse the strength away

Of all thy Diet, often wishing that

Diseases may consume thy ill-got sat.

Therefore recant and usber more appears

In field a Champion for the Cavallier;

Let not his spurre nor false same prick thee on

To fight in unjust warres as thou hast done.

Cav. hors.

Fame is not that I aime at, but the knowne

Right of the King, the trumpet that is blowne

Unto the Battell doth not give me more

Courage, then what I had in him before,

As if we did partake of more then sense

And farre exceeded mans intelligence,

In stooping unto Kings, and doe prove thus

Our selves descended from Bucephalus,

That Horse who did no loyall duty lack

But kneeling downe received on his back

Great Alexander, while men kick and fling

Against the power of so good a King

&illegible; time hath blest us with, O let this force

A change in thee who art a dull Mill-horse.

Thou art no Papist being without merit,

Nor zealous Brownist, for thou dost want spirit.

But with a Halter ty’d to block or pale,

Dost pennance, while thy master drinks his Ale

In some poore Village; such a poore thing are thou

Who Gentry scorne, beare till thy ribs doe bow

Burthens of corne or meale, while that Kings are

My Royall Masters both in Peace and Warre.

Mil-hors.

Boatt not of happy fortune, since time brings

A change to setled States and greatest Kings,

England was happy; peace and plenty too

Did make their rich above here, but now view

The alteration, Warrs hath brought in woe.

And sad destruction doth this land &illegible;

Now thou art proud, but if this warre in peace

Should land thy high ambition would then cease;

Thy strength and courage would find no regard,

Thy plundering service should get no reward,

Although in warrs thou trample &illegible; and kill

Thy soe in age thou shalt bears sacks to &illegible;

As I doe now, and when thy skinne in grlzzle

Groam underneath thy burthen, fart, and fizzle

&illegible; &illegible; an old horse, a souldier of the Kings,

“All imploy’d valour sad repentance brings,

When thou art lame, and wounded in a fight

Not knowing whether thou dost wrong or right,

Or what is the true ground of this sad warre

Where King and subjects both ingaged are;

Both doe pretend the justnesse of their cause.

One for Religion, Liberty, and Lawes;

Doth stand, while that the King doth strive again

His Right and due Prerogative to maintaine;

The king keeps close to this, while subjects be

Crowne mad to eclipse the sonne of Majestie

By enterposting differences; how cause thou judge

Where the fault is: both at each other grunge,

I know that this discourse is farre too high

For us, yet now to taike of Majesty;

In boldest manner is a common thing

While every &illegible; will condemn a King,

And be so politick in their discourse.

Yet know no more then I a poore Mill-horse;

Who for the common-wealth doe stand and goe,

Would every commonwealths man did doe so.

Cav hors.

Mill-horse in this thy space and speech agree

Both wanting spirit dull and tedious bee;

The King and commonwealth are vexed theames

Writ on by many; prechee think on Beanes

And Oates well ground, what need hast thou to care

How the deplored commonwealth doth fare;

For policy this rule in mind doth keep,

“Laugh when thou hast made others grieve and weep

What care we how the State of things doe goe?

“While thou art well, let others seele the woe.

If I have store of provender I care not,

Let Cavalliers full plunder on and spare not,

When Oekingham was burned I stood by

And like each widdowes wept at ne’re an eye,

When the town burnt a fellow said in leather

“He lov’d to see a good fire in cold weather;

And with the simple clowne I doe say still

“If I doe well I care not who doth ill;

For with the Civalliers I keep one course,

And have no more Religion then a Horse,

I care not for the Liberty nor Lawes.

Nor priviledge of Subjects, nor the cause,

Let us stand well affected to good Oates,

While that the ship of State and Kingdome floates

On bloody waves, the staved rack shall be

Crammeed with hey, a commonwealth to me.

Mill-hors.

Alasse I pitty thee thou great war-horse

&illegible; art like Cavalliers without reworse:

The sad at station which the Kingdome setles,

Regarding not, thou casts it at thy heeles

And so dost prove that horses have no &illegible;

Or if they have they little &illegible; coutaine.

Unto the Kingdomes tale thy prick eares lend

A whose griefe I will describe, and right defend.

Cav-hors.

Thou defend right, thy right to the high way

Is lost, as sure as thou dost live by hey,

In telling of a tale without all doubt

Thou needs must stumble, and wilt soon run out

Of breath and sense, good Mill-horse, therefore prethee

Leave tales, there are too many tales already,

That weekly flye with more lies without faile

Then there be baires within a horses taile;

And if the writers angry be I wish,

You would the Cavalliers horse arse both kisse,

Not as the Miller thy back doth kisse with whip,

But as a Lover doth his Mistresse sip;

For know the Cavalliers brave warlick horse

Scornes vulgar Jades, and bids them kisse his arse.

Mill-hors.

Thou pamperd Jade that &illegible; by plunderd oates

My skin’s as good as thine and worth ten groates,

Though join of foot, I come of a good kind,

Of Racers, gotten by the &illegible; wind

A Then the Dare turned her bark back five in the mouth

Of Boreas, being Bortherne breed not South.

The Millers horse before the warres began,

A &illegible; take the way of Lord or Gentleman;

And when Peace shall all, keep in all,

I shall see thee in Cauch or Dung-cart draw,

Cav. hors.

I scorne thy motion, after this sad Warre,

Perhaps I may draw in some Coach or Carre;

And which doth grieve me, Cavaliers most high-born

I may be forced to draw on to Tiburne:

In time of Peace my blood shall not be spilt,

But like to Noble Beere, shall run at Tilt.

In Peace I serve for Triumphs, more then that

I shall be made a Bishop, and grow fat,

As Archey said, when Bishops rul’d ’twas worse,

That had no more Religion then a Horse.

But thou shalt weare thy selfe out, and be still

An everlasting Drudge unto some Mill.

Mil-hors.

No matter, I wil spend my life and health,

Both for my Country and the common-wealth,

And it is Prince-like (if well understood)

To be ill-spoken off for doing good,

And if a horse may shew his good intent,

Some &illegible; raile thus at the Parliament.

Scorn is a burthen laid on good men still.

Which they must beare, as I do Sackes to Mill:

But thou delighted to bear trumpets rattle.

An animall rushing into lawlesse battle;

If thou couldst think of those are slain and dead,

Why skin would blush, and all thy &illegible; look red

With blood of men, but I do with for peace,

On that condition Dogs might eate thy flesh.

When should the &illegible; meat both fetch and bring.

Towne brew good Ale, and drink healths to the King.

Cav. hors.

Base Mill-horse have I broke my bridle, where

I was tyed by my Master Cavaliere

To come and praille with thee, and doest thou

Wish Dogs might eat my flesh? I scorn thee now.

My angry sense a great desire now feeles.

To kick thee into manners with my heeles.

But for the present I will curb my will.

If thou wilt tell me some newes from the mill.

Mil-hors.

If thou wilt tell me newes from &illegible; & Court,

Ile tell thee Mill-newes that shall make thee sport.

Cav. hors.

If Country news thou wilt relate and shew me,

Halters of love shall binde me fast unto thee,

Mil-hors.

It chanced that I carried a young &illegible;

To will, and was to humble much afraid,

Sherid in handsome manner on my back,

And seem’d more heable then the long &illegible; facke

On which she safe, when she alighted, I

Perceiv’d her belly &illegible; grown plumy and high;

I carried many others, and all were

Gotten with childe still by the Cavaleer,

So that this newes for truth I may &illegible; downe,

There’s scarce a &illegible; left in a Market towne;

An woman old with Mufler on her chin,

Did tell the Miller she had plundered been

Thrice by the Cavaliers, and they had taken.

Her featherbads, her brasse, and all her bacon,

And &illegible; her daughter. Bridget that would wed

&illegible; &illegible; was plundered of her maidenhead,

Besides I heare your Cavaliers doe still,

Drinke sacke like water that runs from the Mill;

We heare of Irish Rebels comming over,

Which was a plot that I dare not discover.

And that the malignant Army of the King,

Into this Land blinde Popery would bring.

Cav. hors.

Peace, peace, I see thou dost know nothing now,

Thy fleering jests I cannot well allow;

And there are Mercuriés abroad that will,

Tell better news then a horse of the Mill;

But I will answer thee, and tell thee thus,

Thou lyest as bad as ere did Aulicus.

Who though he writ Court-newes ile tell you what,

Heele lye as fast as both of us can trot.

You tell of Maydens that have been beguild,

And by the Cavaleers are got with childe,

And hast not thou when thou wast fat and idle,

Often times broke thy halter and thy bridle,

And rambled over hedge and ditch to come,

Unto some Mare, whom thou hast quickly wonne

To thy desire, and leapt her in the place,

Of dull Mill-horses to beget a race;

While that the Cavaliers when they do fall

To worke, will get a race of souldiers all.

It had been newes whereas I would have smilde,

If the maids had &illegible; the Cavalliers with childe.

Mill-hors.

I &illegible; over hedge, thou meanst indeed

The Cavalliers, who were compelt’d with speed

Both over hedge and bitch away to flye.

&illegible; When they were lately beat at Newbery.

The Proverb to be true is prob’d by &illegible;

That servants like unto their matters bee;

Those plundering &illegible; on thy back doe ride,

Have fill’d thee with a pamper’d spirit of pride,

And thou hast eaten so much Popish Dates,

That in the &illegible; thou hast got three Popes;

The great Grand-father of that race did come

That &illegible; Pope Joane in triumph through &illegible;

I beare to Mill of corne a plumy long sack.

Thou carried a great Pluto on thy back.

&illegible; Cavallier, and who can then abide thee.

&illegible; When that malignant Fooles and &illegible; doe ride thee.

From town to town, and plunder where they come,

The country is by Cavalliers undone.

And these thy masters are, who fight and kill

And seek the blood of Protestants to spill;

For thus the newes abroad both alwayes runns,

That the Kings forces are in horse most strong.

&illegible; Whereby it doth appeare the &illegible; &illegible; are!

Guilty of blood-shed, in this cruell &illegible;

And yet the Cavalliers horse as I beare

At Kenton field &illegible; themselves for feare.

And the Cavalliers being kill’d, they run about

The held to seek another master out,

Therefore love war, and &illegible; of wounds thy all.

&illegible; While I in Peace doe walk unto the &illegible;;

I will be alwayes true unto my selfe,

And love the Kingdome and the Commonwealth.

Cav. hors.

Mill-horse, because thou shew’st thy ralling &illegible;

Ile give thee a round answer with some kicks,

Which Ile bestow upon thee, but &illegible; undone,

Yonder my master Cavallier doth come

To fetch me back, and Yonder too I see

The Miller comming for to take up thee;

If thou lik’st not my discourse very well,

Mill-horse take up my taile, and so farwell.

FINIS.

 


8.19. Philip Hunton, A Vindication of the Treatise of Monarchy (26 March, 1644)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Philip Hunton, A Vindication of the Treatise of Monarchy, Containing an Answer to Dr Fernes Reply; Also, A more full Discovery of three maine Points;
1. The Ordinance of God in supremacie.
2. The Nature and Kinds of Limitation.
3. The Causes and Meanes of Limitation in Governments.
Done by the authour of the former Treatise.

London, Printed by G. M. for Iohn Bellamy, and are to be sould at his Shop at the Signe of the three Golden-Lyons in Cornehill neare the Royall-Exchange, M. DC. XLIV.

Estimated date of publication

26 March, 1644.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 316; Thomason E. 39. (12.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

A VINDICATION OF THE Treatise of Monarchie.

The Preface.

PErusing with a sad heart and conscience, desirous of Information the Papers made publike by the Defenders of both sides in this wofull division; I found divers of them running out into irreconcileable extreames: among which this Resolver, the Authour of the fuller Answer, and the Divines pleading for Defensive Armes were the chief. In which I conceived there were passages contrary to all true policie, and the particular Frame of this State. Hereon a desire of allaying mens spirits, and reducing them to a moderate compliance in one Truth induced me to a composing of that Treatise, In which how farre I have attained my ayme, I leave it to the world to judge.

But it fals out with me, as it did with Moses endeavouring to set at one his contentious Brethren, I have hard words and censures laid on me for my labour. This Doctour tels me, I have sowne seeds of sedition, opened a way to Rebellion, and termes me an engaged man. But to whom I am engaged, unlesse to Truth, I know not: Engaged indeed I am to defend the Kings Supremacie against one part by my Oath of Allegiance: and engaged to defend the Priviledges of Parliament, and lawfull Liberties of the Subject, against the other part, by my Protestation: beyond these I know none, and perhaps if this censurer knew my condition, he would acknowledge as much. No, those men are rather engaged, whom, ayming at &illegible; and a dominion over their fellow-Presbyters, it much concernes to prove the Power of Kings unlimited, that so they may be able to satisfie their unlimited desires, and uphold them in a boundlesse jurisdiction over the consciences of men; but for this Doctor, I know him not, I judge him not.

Then, for Sedition and Rebellion, The searcher of all hearts knowes how farre they were from being the scope of that discourse, rather it was an utmost assay of appeasment, by shewing the way to a discreet moderation. These Masters of controversie take a right course to subvert the Kingdom by disputing men into a degree of Opposition beyond all Attonement, for as I am perswaded the high spirit of Kings will rather incurre the worst hazzard then submit to such termes, as to be Vniversis minores, that is, subject to their Subjects, common servants and Officers of their Kingdomes, tyed up to an absolute necessity of assenting to the Determinations and Votes of the States: So I am as consident, that these two British Nations, yea very many now being in his Majesties Armies, will spend their last bloud rather then come downe to this Doctors termes, sc. a meere passive non resistence of subversive instruments of Arbitrarie commands, a simple morall liberty, which the basest slaves in the Turks gallies enjoy, because it cannot be taken from them.

For my part, I doe not reckon my life and liberty worth so much pleading for; but the libertie of my Country is deare to me: The established Government is deare to me, because in it is bound up Religion, the publicke Good, yea the very Title of the King to this Crowne. These I plead for against a man, who by his unconscionable resolves of Conscience, hath done what by a pen can be done, to dissolve them: who in three whole books hath undertaken the Patronage of Subverters of Religion, Laws and Government: and thinks it worth his pains if he can procure them an irresistibilitie.

I thought I had weighed out Truth to both sorts with so even a ballance in that Treatise, that none had any cause to complaine. But, I see, this man must have all goe his owne way: He hath a high designe, no lesse then a full conquest of all States; To bind the Consciences and hands of Nations, and deliver them up to the Executioner to inflict on them the capitall doom of subversion, if at any time the supreme Magistrate please to give the word. To this purpose having made some animadversions on scattered passages of my Book. He is pleased to publish them under the stile of a Reply; I may well call it a negative Reply. He denies what I have asserted; and layes downe his owne contradictorie Notions, and that is all; no Scripture nor Reason, but what is fully answered in my former: It is so hollow a discourse, that an ordinary eye may see through it, without the light of any further Answer; yet because he gives me occasion of fuller illustration, and justifying my supposals; and discovering the vanity of his, I have made him this Return, in which I have to my knowledge, left unanswered no passage of moment which concernes me, in his Reply; other parts of it have I left untouched for them to whom they belong.

And now with prostrate humility I beseech that sacred Authoritie, which here againe, is made the matter of this dispute, not to impute iniquity unto me presuming, for Truth and Conscience sake, to make inquiries into it. The Sun-beames strike not dead the poor Mathematician, who standing on this molehill, assaies by his instruments to take the dimensions of that glorious bodie. Yea the great God of Power permits men without the guilt of sin, to search into his Perfections, and to set, not positive, yet negative bounds to Omnipotence it selfe. Let not then his Vicegerent be incensed to disdain, if we search into the limits of his Power. I envie not it’s extent, let it be as large as Truth and Law can stretch it: And my dutie binds me to beleeve that he would not have it larger. Princes require a reasonable subjection, and that is best performed where the nature and measure of Power is best knowne: which to find out is all the drift of my former and this Treatise, unto which now we will passe over.

The Contents of the severall Chapters and Sections.

  • Chap. 1.  THE Case mis-proposed by the Doctor in his Resolution, Sect. 1. His uncharitable rash Censures. His Intents in this Reply come not home to the Case in question, Sect. 2. How far Scripture proofe is to be expected in these Cases, Sect. 3.
  • Chap. 2.  In the Question of Resistance the Doctors Distinction of Times and Persons is vaine. How farre Resistance is asserted by me in this and the former Treatise.
  • Chap. 3.  The Doctor and other of his sort abuse Scripture in this Question, Sect. 1. Scripture warranting this resistance: but having not a word against it. The Doctor in words professing against Absolutenesse, but indeed pleading for it, Sect. 2. Government not only from God: but subordinately from the people, Sect. 3. Irresistiblenesse a Consequent of Absolutenesse. Limited Monarchie is in the very Power, Sect. 4. Mixture must be in the very Power. The Doctors strange and sencelesse conceit of Mixture, Sect. 5. Conquest gives no mor all title before consent, Sect. 6.
  • Chap. 4.  The Doctors vaine and false supposals about Gods Ordinance in Soveraignty. It doth not exclude Limitation of Power, Sect. 1. His false supposals about the Nature and Quality of Limitation, Sect. 2. His false supposals about the Causes and Meanes of Limitation, Sect. 3.
  • Chap. 5.  The Soveraignty of this Kingdome Limited in the very Power, and from its first Originall. The vanity of the Doctors three Titles by Conquest, Sect. 1. Arguments for Limitation and Mixture vindicated, Sect. 2. Seven Queries concerning this Government; Sect. 3.
  • Chap. 6.  The stating of the Question of Resistance asserted. The Appeale ad conscientiam generis humani, in the utmost contention vindicated, Sect. 1. His arguments against Reservation of Power of Resistance, are answered, Sect. 2.
  • Chap. 7.  The vanity of his conceit about jus Regis. His deceitfull citing of Calvin. The Government of the Kingdome of Israel proved absolute, Sect. 1. Instances for Resistance out of the Old Testament justified, Sect. 2.
  • Chap. 8.  The Text, Rom. 13. nothing concernes this Resistance. His unjust charging of me in this Question. His slighting of Doctor Bilson, and other Divines. Resistance of exceeding Acts, no Resistance of the Power, Sect. 1. Emperours of Rome in S. Pauls time proved absolute, Sect. 2.
  • Chap. 9.  His nine Reasons against Resistance answered, Sect. 1. The five reasons for Resistance made good, Sect. 2. The Doctor recedes from his first Assertions, And yeilds us the Question. No evils follow this Resistance; but many its deniall, Sect. 2. The Conclusion of the whole, Sect. 3.

A VINDICATION OF THE Treatise of Monarchie. OR. An Answer to Dr FERNES Reply.

Chap. I. An Answer to the first Section of his Reply.

Sect. 1.THE first Section containes his Preface, where p. 2. He taxes me, that I looke not with a single eye on what he hath written, misconstruing it many times: but whether I have so done or no, it will be manifest in the sequell. Then more then once, he censures me for being engaged. What engagements I have, appeares before in my Preface: But, I set up my rest upon a groundlesse fancie of such a mixture and constitution of this Monarchy, &c. Whose supposals are groundlesse fancies, his or mine, I doubt not will fully appeare in this ensuing discourse. Neither had I any other purpose to which I have sitted that Treatise then the simple finding out of truth, God knowes how ever the Doctor pleaseth to censure the purposes of my heart, Viewing this Resolvers discourse, for the satisfaction of my conscience, I found it confused, and not approaching the Case which now troubles the world: Men enquire about the Lawfulnesse of Resistance of Instruments: He answers concerning Resistance of the King: Men demand, Whether Resistance of subversive Instruments be the Resistance of Gods Ordidinance forbidden, Rom. 13. He supposeth that which is the Question; and makes that the ground of his Resolve which is the sole thing at which the conscience scruples. This put me on a Discourse of Monarchy, that so by a distinct considering of the grounds of true Policie, I might both satisfie my selfe and others: and not suffer mens consciences, seriously desiring sound information to be either puzled or misled by so confuse and indirect a Resolution. Yet something there is which he likes in me, that is, as much as serves his own turne. I doe with much ingenuity disclaime, and with no lesse reason confuse severall Assertions of other Writers, &c. in p. 2. Would he could as well have seen my confutation of his, as of other errours: What I have said against him, as it proceeds from the same impartiall spirit, so it containes the same truth; as, I doubt not, the judicious Reader will discerne. But yet I hold the ground on which their Absurd assertions are raised, sc. that the Mixture is in the Supremacie of Power, only I give the King, apicem potestatis, the top or excellency of Power, that is, the King is the crown or top of the head, &c. Thus is he pleased to jeere me, but how justly, it will hereafter appeare. And whereas I place the Authority of determining the last controversies in a mixt Government, not in the two Houses, this he commends in me: but that I doe not ascribe it to the King; This he exclaimes against, as a ready way to confusion, but why, and how it is so, he tells us not; only promiseth to speake of it more below, but where that below is, I cannot find.

Sect. 2.After he hath thus touched upon those things which he is pleased to tax in my Treatise. He proceeds, p. 4. to shew us what his intent was of first undertaking and now proceeding in this Argument. Well: let us heare what it was. The intent of his first Treatise was to resolve the Consciences of misled people, touching the unlawfulnesse of Armes now taken up against the King. He erres in his proposing of the very Case. I believe he knowes no conscience misled touching this matter: The Case which he should have resolved, if he had done any thing, was touching the unlawfulnesse of Armes now taken up against subverting instruments of the Government of the Kingdome; and that the resisting of these is a Resisting of the King; No wonder if he who shootes at a wrong marke looseth all his arrowes. This wrong proposing and prosecuting of so weighty a case (which I doubt was purposely done) set me first on work in this businesse. Heare then the case more simply proposed: and I refer me to the consciences of men, whether I come not neerer the truth of it, then this proponent hath done. The Houses declare Religion and established Government to be in apparent danger, by meanes of some subversive Counsellours and Instruments about the King. This being supposed, they proceed according to Vote to the Ordinance and execution of the Militia, so to resist and apprehend those Counsellours and Instruments from whom they had declared the danger to spring. This put on the Doctor to his first booke, to resolve the consciences of men, that it was unlawfull: Now see what course he tels us he took to resolve men in this case. He undertakes to make good two Assertions. 1. Were the King so seduced, it were not safe to beare part in the resistance of Armes now used against him. 2. That the case is not so, as they suppose, but rather apparently contrary. In the proofe of these two, he spends his whole book. Concerning the latter I intend no controversie with the Doctor: Would he could make it cleare to the satisfaction of the consciences of all men; that were the way indeed not only to satisfie mens consciences, but to calme the Kingdome into a blessed peace. But the Doctor is but slight in that part; and sayes nothing, but what, as appeares in the Debate in the end of my Treatise, may soone be answered out of the Declarations of the Houses, and the fresh memory of past occurrents: And in this reply he hath not so much as touched upon that Chapt. of my book: But that which in his first Tract he mainely, and in this Reply he solely labours to make good is the first Assertion, which is a universall one, and worthy to be examined in all Ages and Governments, whatsoever becomes of this present contention in this Kingdome. Now concerning that Thesis, in my Treatise of Monarchy I have affirmed and confirmed two things. 1. That if he could make it good, yet it were nothing to the businesse he hath undertook; which is to satisfie the conscience concerning the Unlawfulnesse of Resisting Instruments, not the King, of which hee hath spoken very little or nothing at all. 2. That if he could prove that in some Kingdomes where the will of the King is the peoples Law, Resistance of Instruments were unlawfull, if actuated by the Soveraignes will: Yet in Legall and Limited Governments, it doth not follow to be true: yet this he must make good, if in our present case he satisfie mens consciences as he undertakes. These two are the summe of my Answer to the Doctor in that Treatise, and if in this Reply he doth any thing, he must speake to these points. Something he hath here spoken concerning the Ordinance of God in Supremacy, Of Cases of Resistance; of Kinds of Monarchy, of the Constitution of this Monarchy; but how truly and satisfactorily, it is my part to examine, and let the world judge.

But as if he had already cleared the matter, he proceeds to give sentence before the cause be heard: And doubts not to call the contrary Resolution a Blaspheming of God and the King, p. 4. I answer, If there be any which will defend the lawfulnesse of taking Armes against the King, and in any case to resist the Powers. They crosse the evident truth of Scripture, and I condemne them: Yet me thinks the Doctor deales somewhat severely with them, to call them Blasphemers of God, for every errour about the word is not Blasphemie; but a wilfull and obstinate speaking evill of the things of God. Likewise concerning a King, if it be true that he be seduced; then it is no blasphemie, which alwayes is a falshood. If it be false, yet it is inhumane to call it a blaspheming, when it imputes nothing to him, but to be seduced, which the best and most innocent Prince may be; sure, if it be a blaspheming, it is of the Counsellours and seducers, for to them the evill is imputed.

Then p. 6. He comes to speake of what he intends in this present booke: sc. that he will cleare this point, That the Doctrine teaching that subjects may take Armes against their Soveraigne for the defence of Religion and Liberties, when in danger of subversion, is destitute of Scripture and true reason. As I said, still he drives at a vaine scope; to prove that which none denies: Let him prove, that in our Kingdome, Resistance of subversive instruments is a taking Armes against their Soveraigne, and he does the work; else he proves in vaine. But let us see how in the processe of this booke, that will be cleared which none doth deny. First upon examination of places of Scripture it will appeare, that Gods people were continually under Kings which they might not resist, &c. What then? must it needs follow, that all other people must too? But whether the word containes any thing against Resistance, and how far, we shall enquire in the processe of this dispute. Secondly, Upon the examination of Reason, it will appeare how inconsistent such a Power of Resistance in subjects is with Government, &c. Indeed he will make appeare a great matter; would he would speake something to the Question, and not proceed so indistinctly; I hope in the processe of his book he will come neerer to the businesse then here he promiseth, or else all our labour will be to little purpose.

Sect. 3.After he hath told us what great matters we are to expect in his booke; he complaints how much his expectation hath been deceived by his Adversaries. He confesses, They have great appearance of Reason raised on Aristotles grounds or principles; so that at first sight it seemed unreasonable that subjects should be left without this remedy. If he speake all this of Resistance of their soveraigne, sure it seemes not at all unreasonable, but agreeable to all reason that subjects should be without this remedy: It is directly against the word and all sound reason, that a people lifting up a Person above themselves, and by sacred Covenant giving him a Power above themselves, should afterward on any pretence assume a power of Resisting that person and power, and violate their own Covenant and Oath of due subjection. But if that Person be invested with a limited Power: and he proceed to acts of meere arbitrarinesse without the limits of that Power conferred on him: Then it is all the reason in the world, that the Limiting States should exercise an effectuall restraining Power by resisting instruments of such arbitrary and subversive acts, and we have not a sillable of Scripture contradicting it. But if it seemed so unreasonable to the Doctor, that subjects should be without this remedy; why doth he contradict Reason in a businesse within its compasse? He tells you, He found Reason presently checked with that saying of our Saviour, Mat. 10. 25. It is enough for the Disciple that he be as his Master. And was this all the check your Reason had? It is a very weake Reason which would yeeld to such a check. What? is every Christian bound for his outward state to be in no better case then Christ was? If he were pleased to be borne under an absolute Government, to be of low and poore condition, doth this impose a necessity on all to be no freer, no richer then he was? A man would think his Reason were not only checked, but broken, which should so argue. Let it be proved that by the providence of God we are brought forth under such a Government as our Master was, then will we hold our selves bound by his example, to abide quietly in that condition we are borne to; but if God, as he hath dispensed to many a richer estate then Christ was pleased to have, so hath to us a freer Government; then the Apostle adviseth us to use it rather, and not to be trisled out of it, by a shew of our Masters example, in a case in which it binds no man.

But in what hath his Adversaries so much deceived his expectation? He expected expresse Scripture, but he finds them altogether fayling; only their faith and perswasion is resolved into an appearance of reason raised upon Aristotles grounds and principles. p. 6. Mr Hooker might have taught him that the intent of the Scripture is to deliver us credenda; but in matters within the compasse of Reason, it is enough if we have evident reason for it, Scriptura non contradicente: and I am consident the Scripture hath not a tittle against such a Resistence as I doe maintaine; and we have reason enough for it. The Scripture was not given to prescribe frames of Policie, which are various according to the disposition of people; Generall Rules there are for Government, which being observed, Particulars, which fall under no setled Rule, are left to reason and the positive Lawes of Nations to determine. Yet we are not wholy destitute of warrant from Scripture, as the Doctor affirmes, but are better furnished then he, as it will appeare in the sequell. If Buchaman, and Junius Brutus, or any else have raised any doctrines on Aristotles grounds which will not consist with Gods Ordinance set downe in Scripture concerning Authority, I am not bound to make good other mens excesses: This Replier knowes, that as I repudiate his Assertions tending to the ruine of all Liberties of States: So I hold it unlawfull to use any force against the person, or Authority of the Supreame, even in the most Legall and limited Monarchy. Therefore he doth me exceeding wrong in the close of his first Section, to say, that, I agree with the rest to use what force they can against such a Monarch for suppressing of his tyranny, &c. All I say is, that Force may be used; but neither against the Person nor Authority of the Monarch, which in all Governments of that nature are to be held sacred and inviolate.


Chap. II. An answer to the second Section concerning Cases of Resistence.

I Could have wished, that if it had pleased this Doctor to reply any thing, he would have followed the steps of my Treatise; but sith he intends no full returne, but doth only catch at here and there a passage, without observing any order, I will frame my Answer to the course of his Reply; and cleare the parcels of my book as I find them assaulted in my reading of his. The Title of this Section being Cases of Resistence, the first part of it is spent about such Cases as are put by the Divines who plead for Defensive armes. At length, p. 9. 10. He comes to the alone Case in which I defend Resistence, in the p. 51. of my Tract, where I put the Question of Persons misimployed to serve the illegall destructive commands of the Prince. And I affirm in such case, and of such Persons Forceable Resistance to be lawfull by the two Estates of Parliament. This I prove by five Arguments, which here the Doctor doth not touch, but referres them to the p. 93. of this Reply. Only here he gives us a Magisteriall determination without any proofe at all. But let us heare his Resolution upon the case. He dares not openly to pronounce it unlawfull: but distinguishes of Persons and Times, as if he would yeeld it lawfull in some, but not in others; Certes, if for any, then for the two Estates; if any, then Instruments of subversion: if simply none, why doth he with so great cantele distinguish. Well, audiamus distinguentem? If by those misimployed persons be understood the Commanders and Souldiers of the Kings Armies, I cannot see (nor any man els, I think) but that the resisting of them by a contrary Militia, is a resisting of the King, and unlawfull, p. 9. I answer, I cannot see, nor any man else, I think, why Commanders and Souldiers should have a priviledge of subverting States and Governments more then other men: Can the Royall Power extend to give them an irresistibility, and not to others? Certes, if others may be resisted, much rather Commanders and Souldiers, because there is greater danger of subversion from them then from others: Their being Commanders and Souldiers makes them more dangerous, but not more priviledged: But, he nor none else can see, how such can be resisted, but it must be aresisting of the King, and unlawfull. Perhaps he is mistaken in others, they may have clearer eyes then he hath: In the p. 52. of my Treatise, I have made it luce clarius, that in a Legall Monarchy it is not a Resisting of the King. Then he proceedeth to another sort of men which I hope may be resisted. But if by those misimployed persons be understood other instruments of oppression in times of peace, before it come to Armes. What of these, may such be resisted? Here he resolves very cautelously and timorously, after many words, p. 10. without prejudice to other assertions of his of other resistance, He conceives it not unreasonable to say, First, if private men be sodainely assaulted, and life imminently endangered, and no meanes of avoiding by flight, then is personall defence lawfull, for such sodaine assault carries no pretence of authority with it. What is this to the matter? we enquire not of resisting assulants carrying no pretence of authority with them; but of subverters of Government warranted by the Kings will; and carrying pretence of Authority, though they have none. Secondly, If they come with pretence of Authority, there may be seeking redressement above from Authority, but if that may not be had, yet no resistance. And who then minding to kill or rob, may not make a pretence of Authority, that to be may effect his mischiefe without repugnance? But yet the Doctor will give us a little more, The Ministers of Power in each County, and the Houses of Parliament also (for with him they be equall) may at first stay, restraine, and commit such misimployed instruments, and so represent the matter againe to the King. But is not this to resist them? No; he tells us, this is not to resist. No? if misimployed instruments may be staid restrained, and imprisoned, sure they may be resisted: Else what if they should choose, and will not be committed; The Parliament must not lay hands on them to compell them; for so there may chance to be fight, and slaughter in the apprehension; and then the Doctor would call it Resistance I think. But suppose the Houses of Parliament doe commit such persons and represent the matter to the King, and a King should be so obstinate as to persist in the maintenance of those illegall courses, and to that end imploy the Militia, it is neither Legall nor Reasonable, they should pursue the opposition to the setting up of a contrary Militia or Power, p. 11. Here we see the upshot of the English freedome, and priviledge of Parliament. This is that which I said; These men overturne all liberties, The result of their doctrine destroyes all policies, reducing them all to that which is arbitrary: If the King should set Souldiers to destroy Lawes and Parliaments, They may (if they be able) stay their hands till they goe to the King, and know whether it be indeed his will and pleasure to have them destroyed or no; If he say, Yea; then they must returne and submit to the vilest instruments of subversion, and not lift up a hand to resist them. But let us see, on what weighty reason the Doctor builds this fatall Resolution. This were a contestation of Power with him whose Ministers they are, a levying of warre, an opposing of Armies against Armies. Sure this man doth much abhorre a Civill Warre: I cannot blame him: but yet we may buy an immunity too deare, at the prize of a subversion of Religion, Laws and Government, which is the case in dispute. This were to choose to be killed, rather then to fight: To have a State subverted, rather then disturbed by a warre to prevent it. I grant, There must be no contestation of Power with him whose Ministers they are: But this is the point to be proved, that in this case, it is so: I utterly denie the Royall Power in our State can be communicated to subverting Instruments: And I doe in vaine expect, while the Doctor prooves that, which every where he supposeth: For he builds all on this foundation, sc. That Gods Ordinance is an Absolute unlimited Power, investing the whole will of the Supreame, and cannot be determined in the exercise, but onely morally; the vanitie of which conceit will appeare hereafter, yet note here in the close, that while he pretends a detestation of Civill Warre, he could doe nothing more to foment it, then by defending such Positions of intolerable servitude: Did not such rigid Counsellours of the King of Israel cause the greatest Rent and Civill Warre that ever was made in any Kingdome?


Chap. III. An Answer to the third Section which concerns severall kinds of Monarchy.

Sect. 1.IN my opinion it had been fitter to have treated first of severall kinds of Monarchy; and then of Cases of Resistance; for the subject in which should precede the Question whereof, in all methodicall proceeding. Here againe in the first place, this Replier would make his Reader believe that penury of Scripture-proofe put me upon distinguishing of severall kinds of Monarchy, That so I might lay all the defence of Resistance upon Reason drawne from the severall condition of Monarchies, p. 11. I have sufficiently before discovered my intention in that Treatise. The Resistence which I defend hath as much proofe from Scripture, as a matter of that nature need to have. Then he abuses me, as finding fault with Divines, that pleading for absolutenesse of Monarchicall Power in this Kingdome bring proofes from places of Scripture, p. 12. I complaine not of all Divines, but some, such as this Resolver is: Some, and that but of late yeares; and that but in this kingdome, where such doctrines are the rode to preferments: nor doe I blame them for bringing proofes for subjection, and against Resistance from places of Scripture, as he calumniates me; but I blame their grosse perverting of Scripture; bringing prohibitions of Resistance of Powers against them who condemne it as much as themselves; And of violating the Lords annointed against them who hold them as sacred and inviolate, yea on more solid grounds then themselves doe. And their fraudulent reasoning from one kind of government to another, as if all Politicall provisions of States for their Liberties did make no variation in the case; but that still they were in the same State, as the people subject to the most absolute vassallage.

Sect. 2.But because he boasts so much of setling mens Consciences on warrant from Scripture, that he expects command or allowance of Resistance from Scripture, p. 6. That his Adversaries resolve all their faith and perswasion on an appearance of Reason drawne from Aristotles grounds, ib. and here that I observe there is but little pretence from Scripture for Resistance; and thus would perswade men, as if he had all Scripture for him; we nothing but a few huskes of reason for us: Let him not thinke to carry it thus away with vaunts and big words: I will professe here once for all. He hath not a sillable of Scripture or right reason to satisfie the conscience with in this controversie: If it please this Doctor, let us joyne issue upon it, and put the whole case on this point. The Question betweene us is, Whether in a limited Monarchie, Resistance of subversive Instruments be unlawfull. He affirmes, I denie. He undertakes to satisfie mens consciences that it is unlawfull: bringing not one Text of Scripture, which speakes to the point: Something he brings to proove it unlawfull to resist the Ordinance of God: that the Magistrate which is supreame under God is above all Resistance, p. 84. He doth great matters; who doubts of these things: Then p. 84. he accumulates nine Arguments, but all so non concluding, that ninescore of them will not make one found proving Reason of the point in question, as it will appeare when we come to consider them. On the other side we have both to settle mens consciences on. 1. Examples of Scripture, sc. The peoples rescue of Jonathan: Davids armie against the cut-throats of Saul; that is, subversive Instruments: These being particular men, and in an absolute Monarchie proove the point the more strongly, so strongly that the Doctor is saine to flie to that ordinary evasion, of an extraordinarie priviledge. Besides all those places which prove it lawfull to resist private men, seeking to subvert Lawes and Religion, and the publike good; sith in a limited State they are but private men, though backed with a Commission from the Kings will and pleasure. 2. Then for Reason; I have set downe five, p. 53. all unanswerably concluding the point in Question, as I doubt not the considerate Reader will acknowledge.

He professes, p. 12. That it was never his intent to plead for absolutenesse of Power in the King, if by absolutenesse of Power be meant a Power of Arbitrary Command. What his intent is I know not, but he hath fully done the thing, or I have no understanding to see when a thing is done. In the precedent Section, he resolves all cases into the Arbitrium Regis, the meere pleasure of the King: allowing the Houses of Parliament only a power of staying the hands of destroyers, till it be expressely knowne whether it be the Kings pleasure they shall be destroyed: And I am confident the meanest apprehension will discerne, that they who make the Monarchs sole Will the last judge of all controversies: and simply deny in the last case of subversion, all Power of Resistance of Instruments, even to the supreame Courts of Law and justice, doe without any controversie, resolve all government into an Arbitrarie Absolutenesse. He adds, We allow a distinction of Monarchies and admit the Government of Kingdomes to be of divers kinds, and acknowledge a legall restraint upon the Power of the Monarch in this Kingdome. Verba datis, rem negatis; you allow indeed a kind of distinction of Monarchies, but all within the compasse of Absolute: A legall restraint you seeme to acknowledge; but such an one as resolves into the Arbitrary Will of the Monarch, as I have made it appeare in my former Treatise; and you will never be able to wipe off by this, or any other Reply. Then he promises that in this Booke certaine points will appeare to be truth, agreeable to Scripture and Reason: sc. That Government is not the invention of man, but the institution of God: That Governours have their Power not from the people, but from God: That Governing Power is one and the same in all supreames, and can only be limited in the exercise. And that where a Prince stands supreme, and next to God above all the people, there the Subiects may not take armes and make forceable resistance for any exorbitances. These severall Propositions how farre they contain Truth, and how far not, I shall in the sequell make appear.

After these great promises, he proceeds, p. 13.Sect. 3. to speake somewhat of the Originall of Governing Power: and accuseth me as if I seemed to affirme it to be from God; but in the processe of my booke, he finds me deriving it indeed from the people. I perceiving two contrary opinions concerning the Originall of Government, did in that Treatise endeavour to reconcile them, and to shew in what sence both are true. To that end, as there is manifest, p. 4. I distinguished 3 things. ‘It’s constitution;’ It’s Limitation to one kind. ‘It’s determination to one individuall Person and Family. The first of these I did affirme to be from God: The two latter from Men, and then concluded, In these things we have Doctour Fernes consent. Let us see what exceptions he can take at this peaceable assay of Reconcilement. In the processe of my Discourse he findes me deriving is from the people. What then? Doe I denie it thereby to be from God? as if Subordinates did exclude one another. God hath ordained that Powers should be: People by vertue of that Ordinance give them existence in this or that kind and subiect. The Doctor acknowledges all this, but not in my sence, p. 14. He grants the Designation of the Person, and the Limitation of the Power to severall kinds to be from the consent of the People. I say no more; why doe we not then agree? The plaine truth is, The Doctor will not have Limitation of Power to be at all from the people, what ever he pretends: How then the Limitation of the Power to severall kinds is from the people, as the Doctor yeelds, I cannot tell. Is not Limitation of it into kinds, Limitation of the Power it selfe? But he is possessed that my sound sence is another sence from his; what other he doth not shew: but it is another which he likes not. Why? Because sometimes I say, the people reserve a Power to oppose or displace the Magistrate: Sometime they divest themselves of all superiority. ’Tis true, I say so, but withall I say, that when they reserve such a Power, they constitute no Monarchy. Is it not so, in the highest Ministers of Power in Aristocracies and Democracies? What can he say against so apparent a Truth? 2. I call them, p. 63. Architectonicall Powers. This he derides and saies, This is the riddle of this Governing Power originally in the people. They are Architectonicall Powers, but build upon foundations laid in the aire, p. 14, Then he gives his reason, For before Government established they have not any politique Power, whereby a Command may be laid upon others, but only a naturall power of private resistance. This is false, that they have onely a naturall power of private Resistance. They have indeed no formall politique power, for we speake of a people free from all government; but they have a virtuall radicall power, by publike consent and contract to constitute this or that for me of Government, and resigne up themselves to a condition of subjection on Termes and after a form of their owne constitution; so the Athenians, Lacedemonians and Romans of old having expelled their Kings: and the United Provinces, with others of latter times have done: This is that which I called Architectonicall Power; and the Replier vainly carpes at the name, when he cannot denie the thing. But I know what he aimes at in all this, sc. That Gods Ordinance is an absolute boundlesse Power in all Supremes, uncapable of any limitation, but in the exercise.Sect. 4. Of which folly afterwards.

At length He takes a nearer view of the Formes of Monarchie, spoken of by me, and makes a few observations upon such particulars as him pleaseth, p. 14. Let us follow his steps. First, for Absolute Monarchie, whereas I say it is, when Soveraignty is so fully in one, that it hath no limitation under God, but the Monarches owne will. He approves my description; but threatens to remember it below, p. 15. Let him doe so; and make his best advantage of it, only here he cannot forbeare one note, that then it is not the deniall of resistance which makes a Monarch absolute; but the deniall of a law to bound his Will. I doe grant it; but with all I say, that it is necessariò consequutivum, though it be not constitutivum: for sith a Monarch which is obsolute hath no Law to bound his Will; but his very Will is the Subjects Law, then every act of his Will is Gods Ordinance, and so by consequence it is unresistible. Also, p. 15. He allowes it, when I say, A limited Monarch is he who hath a Law besides his owne Will for the measure of his power. But yet he dislikes that I say, He must be limited in the Power it selfe, and not only in the exercise; and I added a reason, for an Absolute Monarch may stint himselfe in the exercise of his Power, and yet remaine absolute. What saies he to this? True, if such a Monarch limit himself and reserve a Power to vary,—but if he fix a Law with promise not to varie, then in those cases he is limited. Note the fraud of this Replier, he alters his terms and puts things as opposite which are not so: He should say, if he limit himselfe, and reserve a power to varie; then he is absolute; but if he limit himselfe and reserve no Power to varie (for then the opposition is direct) then he is limited. But in stead of saying (and reserve no power to varie) he saies, but [if he promise not to vary] I say that promise not to vary, if it be a simple promise of not varying, it doth not make him limited in his Power, any more then morally, and so every Absolute Monarch is limited. I affirme still, it is Limitation of the Power it selfe, not barely of the exercise, which constitutes a Limited Monarch: for Monarchy is a state of Power, and therefore it’s specificative distinction must be from something which distinguisheth Powers, and not the exercise of Powers; but this is enough proved in the 5c page of that Treatise.

Secondly, he blames me for that I suppose a Limited Monarch must be radically, that is, originally invested with such a measure of limited Power, and that limited, ab externo, and not from the free determination of his owne Will. Here he adds originally of his owne; that so he might seeme to finde a contradiction, when I afterward say, that it may be done by originall constitution, or by after condescent; but yet he confesseth, I have a salve, when I make it such a condescent, as is equivalent to an Originall Constitution, because amounting to a change of Title, and are solution in the Monarch to be subjected to, no other way. I make no salve, nor doe I need any; he who weighes the Uniformity of Truth in that Treatise will see it needs no salves: Onely I distinguish those things which are in their natures distinct, which if the Doctour had done, this Contention either had not been begun, or would soon have an end: Who sees not that a Promise, whereby a Monarch may bind himselfe may either be with a limitation of the bond of subjection, or without: And that this makes a reall difference; for in this the Government remaines the same, because the Dutie of subjection received no variation; but in that there is for so much a Transitus into a limited condition. But these things cannot be more fully and clearly expressed then they are in the page 13. of that Treatise. But he answers, Where there is such a change of Title, it is done at once, and by expresse and notorious resignation of former Power; but it is not necessary that an absolute Monarch should come to a limited Condition after that manner, I say, if he will passe into a limited condition, it is necessary there be a limitation of his Power, else he is not truly limited: But that all such limitation be done at once and by notorious resignation, it is not necessary, as will appeare afterward where this matter of Limitation is more distinctly handled.

Sect. 5.His next complaint is against something I have in the page 25. sc. That in a mixed Government (if it be of three) the Soveraign Power must be in all three originally, and from fundamentall constitution. He judges this not necessary, p. 17. and he gives a wonderfull Reason: For as Limitation may be only of the exercise of the Power, and not of the Power it selfe; so mixture is in regard of Persons ioyned to the Monarch for certain acts and purposes; but that they should have any share in the Soveraign power, the nature of Monarchy will not admit. 1. Just so; for as a Monarchy is not limited unlesse there be a limitation of Power, for Monarchy is a Power; so a Monarchy cannot be mixed, unlesse there be a mixture of Powers, for Monarchy is a Power; and to say a mixt Monarchy, and yet the Power not mixt, is to speake contradictories. 2. If the mixture be not of divers concurrent Powers; wherof is it? He tells us, of the Monarch and certaine other Persons joyned with him for certaine acts and purposes. These joyned Persons, have they any concurring Power to doe those acts for which they are joyned? If not; then the adjoyning is futulous and vaine, and the Power of Monarchy is mixed of a Person having Power, and of others having no Power to doe that for which they are joyned. You will say, They have Power, but not distinct from that of the Monarch: that is, they have none; for in mixture, if it be not distinct, it is none at all. Againe if they have any, it must be distinct, for subordinate it cannot be; if the Acts to which they concurre be supreme Acts, unlesse we should be so absurd as to say, They may concurre to supreme Acts, by a subordinate Power. But let us see, what a maine Reason he hath for averring a conceit subject to such absurdities. Such a mixture would make severall independent powers in the same State or Kingdome, which is most absurd. I grant it is absurd, if he speake of severall complete independent powers; but to affirme severall incomplete independent powers concurring to make up one integrall mixt power, it is no absurdity at all for so it is, in all Aristocracies and Democracies, and must be acknowledged in all mixed States, where the supremacie is not wholy in the hands of one person. Yet here we doe not so make them independent, but that we give a large predominancie to One, as, in nature, in all mixed bodies there is, as I have at large explained my selfe in the next Section, if the Doctor had been at leasure to have taken notice of it. I yeild to that which he sayes, p. 17. that it is not necessary the Mixture should be so Originall, but that it may also come afterwards by condescent: It matters not, so it be originall, that is, radicall: of Powers, and not of meere Acts: And indeed, there cannot be a mixture of Acts, unlesse it be also of Powers: for Acts are from Powers: and where Powers are subordinate, there can be no mixture in their Acts; the Acts of causes subordinate, are also subordinate, and not coordinate and mixed. But I there brought two Arguments to prove that in a Mixed Government, the Concurrents must have independent and distinct Powers. Let us see how he answers them. 1. Because else it would be no mixture, but a derivation of Power, which is seen in the most simple Monarchy. He answers, that derivation of Power is either upon substitute Officers supplying the absence of the Monarch in the execution of Power: and this is in the most simple Monarchy. Or else upon Persons whose concurrence and consent is required to certaine Acts of Monarchicall Power; and this makes a mixture, though they have no share in the Power it selfe, p. 17. I answer, 1. Absence or presence of the Monarch; whether they Act for him, or with him, varies not the case, If the Power they work by be derived from him, then it is his Power, and so constitutes no Mixture. 2. As if in the most simple Monarchy, the Soveraigne doth mannage the ardua imperij, the weightiest matters of State alone; and not by consent of his Counsell; without whom he is morally bound, (that is, on the sinne of rashnesse) not to transact them, and that is all, which the Doctor yeilds to the Houses of Parliament, sc. that the King is morally bound to their concurrence and consent in certaine Acts. This is nothing but the shadow of a Mixture; If the Power of Acting be so in one, that, if he please, he may doe those Acts without the concurrence of those adjunct Persons, though he ought not, it is no Mixture, because the Power is simple and One; and mixed Acts cannot flow from one simple Power. This the Doctor sees, and therefore sayes, If this Authour will not call this a Mixture, we cannot help it, p. 18. We doe not enquire of Names, but of things; nor whether it make a difference in Government or no; We treat of a Mixt Governement: and, I think, no man of common sense will affirme, that a Government can be really mixed, and yet the Power be simple. 2. Because the End of Mixture (which is Effectuall Limitation) cannot be had by a derivate Power. He answers; Though a Derivate Power cannot set new bounds to the Soveraigne Power, yet may it stand to keep in a legall way those bounds which the soveraigne Power hath set to it selfe. Observe, He dares not to say, They may keep: but only stand to keep; nor stand neither, but by advice; that is morally: If he will exceed those bounds, the Act is valid, and hath all its Authority without them: Only he sins, if he doe so; because he hath promised he would not doe it without them: Here’s excellent Limitation and Confinement from exorbitancies: A bare promise, without such adoe, in constituting States and Mixtures, would be altogether as good a bounds; but of this we shall have more occasion to speake afterward.

Sect. 6.In the close of this Section he turnes back to the p. 21. of my book, and hath somewhat to say to my Assertions about Monarchy by conquest. There first I say, If the invasion be made upon pretence of Title, and the pretender doth prevaile, it is not Conquest properly, but a Vindication of a Title: and then the Government is such as the Title is by which he claimed. He tells us, He sees no injustice in it, if such a one having prevailed should use such a people as a Conquerour, p. 19. The Lord keep us from this mans justice. What; No injustice? If the Pretenders Title allowed by a great part of the people, he by their aide subdues the rest, shall he for their labour crush them into servitude, and use the power of a Conquerour, without injustice? 2. Suppose the people not convinced of the right of his Title make at first some opposition; but yet the pretence of his Title, and apprehension that he seekes no more power then his Title imports, work a yeilding disposition in them, so that they withstand not so universally, nor so long as they might have done; but at length submit to him on his pretended termes: were it not high injustice to take advantage on such a people, and having them under hatches to desert those termes on which they yeilded, and use the full right of a Conquerour: This was Englands case with Duke William. But the maine thing which sticks by him is something I have delivered, p. 23. It is an uncontrolable truth in policie, that the consent of the people, either by themselves or their Ancestours, is the only meane in ordinary providence, by which soveraignty is conferred upon any person or family. Against this he is very angry; and opposeth it in many words; but to my Argument from the Morall bond of subjection, he sayes nothing at all. He termes it good policie, but bad divinity, p. 20. And sets up an Antiposition, that when the invading Prince has perfectly subdued a people (there being no heyre to whom they are bound) and hath setled and constituted a frame of Government, then providence doth sufficiently discover it selfe, and such a people ought to submit and take this Prince as set over them by the hand of providence. As if these two were contrary: I say, They are not bound untill they consent: He sayes, in such a case they are bound to consent, because then providence discovers it selfe: And he brings Calvin at large to prove that which none denies: I grant a people (not preobliged,) fully overcome should much sin against Gods providence by obstinacie, if on a meere will, they consent not to reasonable termes of subjection: But this I say, There is no morall obligation to Authority, before that consent bind them: Conquest may be an Antecedent cause; but the immediate and formall cause is only the consent of the people; which he cannot say against; for that must be morall, and not meerely violent. The call of providence challengeth a contented submission, if there be no reason hindring it; but if a precedent Oath or some other sound reason intervene, then it is no call requiring submission: Neither can the fullest conquest make a people debtors, but they remaine free from any morall bond; for the providence of God being of it selfe externall, can induce no morall state; but that providence which on one discovery calls to a submission: on a like discovery may free them againe, if nothing else come between, to render them morally bound: A Travellour, by the providence of God shut up into the hands of a Robber, hath his life and protection promised him in his journey, if he will promise to pay him so much money: I say, this Travailor should sin against his own life, and the providence of God, offering him those termes, if obstinately he refuse submission: Yet no man will say he owes the robber so much money, because he hath him at his mercy, untill he by promise make himselfe a debtor: Thus have I made good that maxime of mine to be an uncontrouleable Truth, good Policie, and good Divinity too; mangre all the Doctor hath or can say against it.


Chap. IV. Wherein the vanity and falshood of the supposals whereon the Doctor hath built all his discourses is made appeare.

Sect. 1.AFter a scattered gleaning of passages in the former Sections, the Doctor undertakes the two great Questions. 1. Of the Constitution of this Monarchy, in his Sect. 4. 2. Of Resistence, in the remainder of his book. Which two, we should now immediately pursue; but that another work more conducent to the ending of this contention will for a while divert me.

Errour in the search of controverted truths doth more often arise from the judgement, then from the reason: Men doe more offend in laying false grounds; then in deducing false inferences from true grounds; This I have observed in the Doctors bookes: He truly argues, but from false principles; and then the superstructure must needs be answerable, so that, overthrow his foundations, and then all his building will of it selfe ruine into apparent falshood. I confesse he every where sayes the same of my Grounds, on which I have built that Treatise: He cals them false and groundlesse supposals, and fancies, and what else he pleaseth: I will therefore make him a Ayre offer: Let us make a short work of it: let us joyne issue upon our supposals, on which both our discourses are built.

This Doctors supposals which he scarce ever makes shew to prove and on which he hath built his Resolves and Discourses I doubt not to call unsound and false: and doe professe the contrary to be my grounds whose truth I will maintaine. His may be reduced to foure heads. 1. Concerning the Ordinance of God in Soveraignty. 2. Concerning the Nature and Quality of Limitation. 3. The Meanes and causes of Limitation. 4. The Constitution of this Monarchy. And according to this order we will take them into examination.

Of Gods ordinance in supremacie.First, Of the Ordinance of God in Magistracy, He proceeds on two false principles. 1. That the Governing power is one and the same which God gives and settles upon the person that is supreme, p. 13. that is, it is absolute and unlimited in the power it selfe; and may be limited only in the exercise thereof, p. 17. 2. Which followes from the former, that Consent of people may be the meane of designing the person, and yeilding subjection to him, who else could not challenge it more then an other man; also a meane of limiting that power in the exercise of it; but not the measure of the power it selfe, which in such a measure is given of God to all Soveraignes, p. 41. so then;Question proposed. let this be the Question, Whether it be Gods Ordinance that Governing power in all Soveraignes be one unlimited thing; and can receive no measure from the people? The Doctor affirmes it; and p. 84. tells us he hath often insinuated it; but he should once directly prove it, if he be able, so he might have prescribed to the whole controversie; for if he can make this good, in vaine doe we enquire about the constitution of this Monarchy; or the lawfulnesse of resistance of subversive instruments of the Princes will. Doth he think a covert insinuation would serve the turne to impose such an Assertion, which frustrates the intent of mankind in framing limitations of Governing power; and captives all into an absolute passive subjection to the vilest instruments of the will of him who is supreme. In all his reply I find but two places which have any shew of proofe of this overhold Assertion. One is p. 14. Before Government established the people have not any power of a community or politick power whereby a command may be laid upon others; but only a naturall power of private resistance. The other is p. 42. The people have not of themselves out of Government, the maine power, the power of life and death, how then can they give it either for Government, or reserve it for Resistance? Here be weake foundations to build such an Assertion, and three such insulting books on. What a nothing this is, I shall make appeare anon.

Question stated.Now I hold the Negative of this Question; and doubt not to approve it firme truth: To that end, first I will premise such things as we agree in, that so the point in question may the more distinctly appeare. Which I apprehend are or may be these. 1. That Governing power is originally from Gods Ordinance. 2. That it being so, is unresistible in its whole latitude, in all the acts which flow from it. This the Apostle is cleare for, Rom. 13. and for no more, that I know. Also that this is true as well in Limited as Absolute Governments; v. g. In absolute Monarchy, where Authority doth invest the whole will; the Monarch is unresistible in all the acts of his reasonable will; because all are acts flowing from Gods Ordinance. So in limited Monarchy, where Authority doth not simply invest the will of a Monarch, but so far forth as it is regulated by such a law, the Monarch is unresistible in all the acts of his will which are according to that law; because they are acts flowing from Gods Ordinance: Yea though either of these doe limit himselfe in the exercise of his power, no way thereby diminishing the fulnesse of his power; and afterward exceed those limits, yet he is unresistible, and to be subjected to actively in lawfull things, and passively in unlawfull: my reason is, because even those acts, notwithstanding limitation, flow from Gods Ordinance of Authority, which remaines the same, and not lessened by such limitation. 3. This governing power is ordinarily conveyed to persons by publick consent, which is a point made good in my former Treatise, and in the former chapter hereof. 4. That this publick consent is not only a meane, but hath a causall influence in conveying Authority to persons. 5. That men working by such consent as second causes, doe necessarily convey such Authority, as God hath ordained; so that, if it can be proved either by Scripture or sound reason, that it is Gods ordinance, that supremacie should be unlimited, and as large as all the acts of his will which hath it, then whatever men capitulate about limitation of it, is vaine, so that the Doctor need prove only that point; and for my part I will give him the cause. 6. Limitation of Power may be either of Acts, when Power is conveyed to Persons to doe certaine Acts of Power; but not all. Or else of Manner of working; when Power is conveyed to doe all Acts of Authority, but according to such a prescribed Rule. Now I grant the former cannot be in the conveyance of Soveraigne Power, an inferiour Officer may be limited by commission to certaine acts of Power; and have no Authority to do other Acts of power; but when Soveraignty is conveyed, and the Person is set up next to God, above all the people, as the Doctour saith. He must have an unlimited Power in respect of Acts of Government: for Gods Ordinance is not onely that there should be Power for such an end; sc. a Peaceable life in godlinesse and honestie; but sufficiencie of Power for the attainment of that end: So that all Power of doing any Act needfull for that end, must be in him who is supreme, and the comprehensive Head of Power to inferiour Magistrates. So that all the Question truly stated is about the other sort of Limitation, sc. Whether Soveraigne Power be so unlimited in its Rule of Acting, that it investeth the whole Reasonable Will of him who hath it: So that all the acts which proceed from him who hath it according to the rule of his owne Reason, be potestative, and from Gods Ordinance.

Question determined.Secondly, having thus punctually stated the Question, the Determination must proceed in a double way, sc. 1. In simple Governments. 2. In mixed Governments. I do maintain the Negative in both: and my proof shall be formed accordingly.

Assert. 1.First then, In simple Government, Power is not one Unlimited thing in the supreme: But may be limited in the very being and root of it. 1. The cause or meane by which alone it is conveyed,Reas. 1. if it bestow or convey only a limited Power, then it is limited in the very Being of it. For there can be no more then is conveyed: Now we know, the people by their publike act of consent and compact, may either bind themselves to a full subjection to the Monarchs Will guided by his owne Reason; or by some constituted rule or law set him to governe by; which latter if they doe, then is his Authority radically limited: For they owing no more subjection; He can have no farther Power. 2. If soveraignty may be so limited,Reas. 1. that Active Obedience is not due to the commands which exceed those limits, but may lawfully be denied to them (as the Doctour acknowledges it may, p. 16.) Then it may be limited in the Power it selfe: For in such case the Power exceeds not the limitation; for if the exceeding Acts were potestative, we owe Active subjection to them, in as much as they are the Ordinance of God, to which in omnibus non prohibitis, Active subjection is due.Reas. 3. 3. If Power in the supreme be such, that it cannot be limited, then either because it is Gods Ordinance; or else because it is supreme: but its being Gods Ordinance hinders not; for we see, Rom. 23. All Powers as well supreme, as subordinate are Gods Ordinance, yet subordinate Powers may be limited, not only in the Rule of &illegible; but in the kind of Acts; as none can denie. Neither its being supreme doth hinder its limitablenesse; indeed, as before it hinders it from being capable of confinement, in the kind of Acts: but in the measure or rule of working, it doth not hinder, in as much as a Soveraigne Power may as well attaine its end, by being confined to another Law from without, as by the Law of its own Reason, if not much better; also we no where finde Gods Word making any difference or giving power to confine subordinate Powers; but forbidding it of Soveraignes, 4.Reas. 4. That is to be granted, which denied makes all Soveraignes arbitrary, and of equall Power; but to affirme that Power is one, unlimited, and investing all the Acts of the Soveraignes Will doth so, for then is soveraignty arbitrary, not when it hath no morall bounds, for then none were or could be arbitrary; but when Power is so fully in one that every Act of his Arbitrium or Will is Potestative and soveraigne.Reas. 5. 5. I have the judgement of all the Reformed Churches and Divines in Germany, France, Belgia, Scotland, on my part; who have both allowed and actually used forceable Resistance against subversive Instruments of their Soveraignes Will; yea our owne famous Princes Elizabeth, James, and our present Soveraigne, both by edicts, and Assistance have justified the same: which they would not have done, had they been perswaded of such an unlimited Ordinance of God investing all the Acts of the Will of him who is supreme. So that by all this it appears that the Doctors conceit of such an unlimited Ordinance of God, which he brings not a tittle of Gods word to prove, is a meere chimera and groundlesse conceit.

Object.Now the onely difficulty, which I can thinke on, is this. Gods Ordinance in soveraignty, as before, is not onely Power to such an end: but sufficiencie of Power to the assecution of that end: now a limited Power seemeth not to be sufficient for the end of Government, because there are two Powers necessary to the end of Government, sc. Power of making and authentique Interpreting of Laws, which are not consistent with a Limitation of Power.

Sol.I answer: It is true of Limitation in respect of Acts; and therefore I averre, that such a Limitation cannot be where Power is supreme: but for Limitation to a Rule and defined way of Working, I cannot see how it with-stands the end of Government: So that supposing Power of making and Interpreting Laws be necessary to the end of Government, yet that they be Absolutely resident in him who is supreme, sc. To make Lawes and Interprete Lawes authoritatively without being bound to follow any Light or Rule therin, but his owne Reason is not necessary to the end of Government: In these Acts a regulated Power is enough in the most simple State, sc. a Power to make now Lawes, if any be needfull; and Interpreting the old, if ambiguous, according to the Rule of the former established Laws; and by the advise of his learned Counsell and Judges of his supreme Courts of Justice. We see in matters spirituall, there is no Legislative Power resident, to ordain or give authentique sence in matters de side, yet the Church stands well enough; one standing Rule of Scripture being sufficient with a ministeriall Interpretation: So it is probable a State might, by a complete standing Rule of Law, and a Ministeriall Power of Interpretation, were there no Legislative Power resident in any Supreme Magistrate thereof.

Assert. 2.But the matter is farre more cleare in a mixed Government; so that were it necessary in a simple Government, that the Supreme should be unlimited in his Power, yet in a Mixed (which is enough for us in this Kingdome) evidently it is not so: And to make this appeare, I will lay downe three grounds. 1. Such a Government may be established that the supreme Power may be placed in many persons, either of the same, or divers condition, that is, in a mixed Subject: else all formes were unlawfull except simple Monarchie. 2. If this supreame Power be inequally placed in these Persons or States of men; so that a reall sublimity and Principality be given to one, then the denomination may be taken from that Principall: and so it is a Monarchy, or Aristocracy, or Democracy mixed in the Power it selfe; however it pleaseth this Replier to deride it, with the top, or Crowne of the head: of which more hereafter. 3. Where the Supremacy of power is thus in many, although all taken together have an unlimited Power, as in ours, yet neither of them severall by himselfe hath, or can have; for it is a contradiction, that it be resident in many, and yet unlimitedly in One.

Now to those two shewes of Argument, which in the beginning I produced out of this Reply, I say, before Government be established it is true the people have no formall Politique Power of Life and Death; yet they have a seminall; that is, every one for himselfe, his family and posterity hath a power of resigning up their naturall liberty, to be governed by One, or many; after this or that forme as they shall judge fittest. God ordaining that Powers should be to such an end, hath thereby legitimated and ratified any Consent or Contract which people may make of parting with their liberty and giving Magistrates a common Power over them to that end. And Gods not prescribing any Rule or Measure of Power by his Ordinance of Authority, hath left it in the peoples liberty, to resigne up themselves according to such Rule and Termes, as they judge fittest, so it be such as the end of his Ordinance may be attained thereby. Thus although by it selfe, and excluding Gods Ordinance they have no immediate Power to lay a command on others, nor Power of life and death, yet in vertue of Gods Ordinance their common consent and contract is sufficient to set up such a Power which is endowed with a sufficiency of Command for Government and the end of Government over those which have, each man for himselfe and his, set it up. So although second Causes have no Power by themselves to produce their effects; yet working in vertue of the first Cause they have Power to produce effects, sometimes farre beyond their own Measure. Therefore I desire this Doctour either to bring some Ordinance of God expressely forbidding to set any bounds or Rule of Power upon the Will of the Magistrate; or else let him suffer Man-kind to use their Right in resigoing up that liberty which God and nature hath given them upon such termes and conditions as they apprehend best for their own good: and the due end of Government.

Summe.In the close of this Question, I will lay downe three Conclusions concerning the Ordinance of God, and the Nature of Soveraigntie.

Conclus. 1.1. God hath ordained that in Societies of Men there should be a Politike Power, for a peaceable and godly life: This Ordinance hath put a Seminall Power in all the Societies of Men, sc. a Liberty and Power by common Consent to resigne up themselves and theirs to one Supreame; thereby constituting a common Politique Power.

Conclus. 2.2. God in his Ordinance for Government having not determined any kind or forme of Power; hath left it to the libertie of Societies of men to choose to which kind they will resigne up themselves, either to a supreme regulated in the Acts of his Will by his owne Reason, as in absolute Government; or to one regulated by a Common Reason or Law constituted by publike consent, as in Limited.

Conclus. 3.3. God in his Ordinance for Government having not determined the subject of this Power, hath left it to the choice of Societies to invest with this Soveraigntie, either one Person or many, and those either of the same, or divers sorts and rankes of men; Whence arise simple or mixed Governments, and this is the Architectonicall Power left in societies before they are engaged in a Government, which the Doctour doth so causlesly deride: Here is the summe of what I do averre concerning Gods Ordinance in Soveraigntie, which I challenge the Doctour or any else to gain-say.

Sect. 2.The second sort of the Doctors false supposals respect the Nature and Quality of Limitation, where also I observe that he proceeds on two false and fallacious Principles, sc. 1. He every where confounds Morall and Civill or Legall Limitation,Of nature and Quality of Limitation. so p. 18. 93. 39. 2. That Soveraignty is capable onely of a morall Limitation, p. 39, 42., So that if any other be in any State ordained, He cannot beleeve but such a condition is unlawfull, and unreasonable against the Order of Government. p. 39. If the nature of Limitation be well knowne, it will appeare that the Doctor hath done very inconsiderately, or rather very fraudulently (for he hath obscured the Truth much by it) in confounding morall and Civill Limitation. We will therefore consider the nature of Limitation something more accurately then I have done in my former Treatise; for it will be a great light to the whole controversie.

Pos. 1.First, We must consider a distinction of Power, which is either, A simple Power of Willing or Doing, which is in every Morall Agent, 2. A Power of Authoritative and obligatorie Willing or Doing; so that an act of it, whether a Will of Command or Censure expressed, hath in it a binding power to subjection, this is that which we call Magistracy, of whose Limitation now we treat.

2.Secondly, concerning Limitation; we must know that it induceth an absolute necessity of not producing any Act beyond those Limits. For a Power having bounds beyond which it can exceed, if it please, though with difficulty, it is not properly limited, but hindred.

3.Thirdly, This necessity of not exceeding those bounds is such as the bounds themselves are; so that it is ever true, That a Power in What Way it is limited cannot exceed those limits.

4.Fourthly, There are of this Power but two sorts of Limits, sc. 1. Morall, and 2. Civill or Politique. Of which two we must distinctly consider.Of Moral limits. 1. Morall Limits is the Morall Will or Law of God; and a Power is said to be limited by this, not when it cannot produce any Act at all: but when it cannot morally produce it, that is, without sin. For the supervening of a morall bond, doth not take away the Power of doing, but of right or sinlesse doing: v. g. in Naturall Powers. Gods prohibition of eating Swines flesh, did not take away from the Jew the naturall Power of eating it; but the power of sinlesse eating it. So in Civill power a prohibition of God comming upon it, doth not take away the Power of Civill and Authoritative Doing; but of lawfull, or sinlesse doing. And hence it followes, 1. That Morall Limitation is only of the Exercise of Power; not of the power it selfe: for the power is not thereby taken away, but remaines equally extense and able to all its acts, as it was before; only now it cannot put forth it selfe unto certaine Acts without sinne, which it could before: Thus an Absolute Monarch who hath a power of doing, as extense as his Reasonable Will, promises to doe but this, or in this manner: now he is morally bound, by vertue of this promise; and cannot without sinne doe otherwise: yet if he doe, his Commanding Power is the same, and its act binding to the Subject. And so it is proportionably in Legall Governments. Cyprian Bishop of Carthage hath by the Canons a power of judging Ecclesiasticall causes committed to him: He resolves and promises to doe nothing of moment herein, but by the consent of his Clergie, now he is morally bound: and if afterward he doe a thing by himselfe without their consent, he sins: yet no man will say his Episcopall power is lessened; or the act he so doth, is canonically invalid, and not obligatorie. 2. Yea it followes also that it is not properly a Limitation of the Exercise of power neither: for by a morall bond, the Power is not so bound up, but that it can exercise it selfe, and that validly too, though not without sinne, as appeares before. 3. Also that it is no detraction from Absolutenesse of Power; nor is it sufficient to make a distinction of it into Absolute and Limited. For, 1. It causes no reall Limitation of power, either in the nature, or exercise of it. 2. It is not distinctive, being to be found in the most absolute power under heaven,Legall Limits. all being bounded by Gods Law, the Law of Equity, and many promises by themselves made.

2. Civill or Legall Limits cause a Civill and Legall definement of Authority, so that, its exceeding acts are not Legall and binding, that is, are non Authoritative: for as a Morall bond induces a necessity of consinement in esse morali; so a Civill and Legall bond doth in esse legali & obligatorio. Hence follows, 1. It is these Legall and civill bounds which constitute a Government in a limited condition, not those morall; for this is distinctive and is never found in an absolute Governement, for there the Soveraigne by promise or Oath binding himselfe to a stated course doth put no Law civill upon his power, or the exercise of it; for though he sinne in exceeding afterwards, yet his acts are truely Legall and Authoritative. 2. This induceth a reall Limitation of power, neither can it be only of exercise; for sith it brings an illegality and unauthoritativenesse on acts exceeding, that is, makes them none in esse civili & politico, it is a limitation of Power it selfe; for when a Power can produce no potentiall acts beyond such limits, then it is limited in the very being. 3. Acts exceeding politique and legall Limitation, being not Legall nor authoritative in that State can give no authoritie to the Instruments, and therefore they may be resisted without resistance or violation of Authoritie. Whereas it is otherwise in Acts exceeding morall Limitation; for being authoritative, they authorize the Instrument, and give him an unresistance.

In summe: Limitation morall and civill or legall doe differ in three main particulars.

Conclus. 1.1. Morall, sith it is no politique or Authoritative Act, makes no reall detraction either in power or exercise of it, and therefore agrees with the most absolute Government: whereas Legall, being a politique and authoritative Act makes a reall diminution; and so is the ratio formalis, or distinctive conceit constituting Limited government; nor can be found in absolute.

Conclus. 2.2. Hence, Exceeding Acts notwithstanding morall limitation are authoritative, proceed from Gods Ordinance, and challenge subjection: but they are otherwise which exceed a legall limitation.

Conclus. 3.3. Exceeding Acts in morall limitation being authoritative have the Sword or compelling power annexed to them, which may not be resisted: but in Legall, being not authoritative, they have not the sword or compelling power annexed, and therefore may be resisted in their Instruments: I will illustrate all this by a familiar instance. In our Government, a Iudge hath a Commission to heare and determine Causes according to the Verdict of twelve men. Here is a Power limited in the very being, that is Legally and Civilly. This Iudge useth indirect meanes to corrupt the Iurie to bring in an unjust Verdict; but judgeth as his Commission binds him according to their Verdict: Here is a morall exceeding, yet the Act of judgement is Authoritative, because according to his Commission, and must not be resisted. Againe, He passeth sentence in another cause expressely against the Verdict of the Iury, in an arbitrary way. Here is a Legall exceeding, and the sentence is non authoritative. He having no such Power committed to him, the sentence can have no binding power in it. Hereby it appeares how without any ground of Truth, the former supposals are.

Sect. 3.Thirdly concerning the Causes and Meanes of Limitation the Doctors supposals are, 1. That Radicall Limitation, that is, of the Power it selfe requires an expresse and notorious act, it must be done in the beginning and at once. p. 15. 24. 39. 2. That a Prince may so limit himselfe, as not to require to be actively subjected to, and yet be limited only in the exercise, not in the power it selfe,Causes & meanes of Limitation. p. 16. 3. That no Limitation by after condescent, is of the Power it selfe, p. 28. this being a consequent from the first. Now that the falshood of these and the like grounds every where scattered in his bookes may appeare; Let us a little more diligently handle the Causes and Meanes of Limitation, which, as before, being twofold, Morall and Civill; We will begin with Morall. 1.Causes of Moral Limitation. Now the Formall cause of a meere Morall Limitation, is that which morally bounds or makes sinfull any act of Power. We are therefore to enquire what it is which can doe that. And this is, 1. Principally the Morall Law of God forbidding such an exercise of Power. This is an universall, perpetuall and invincible Limitation of all power of Government, either absolute or legall, yea of all Active Power of reasonable creatures. 2. There is another meane of Limitation morall, sc. a Promise, Oath or positive constitution, whereby a Prince puts a bond upon himselfe, making that now sinfull to be done, which before was not so. This also induces a morall Limitation, as well in absolute as legall Governments; as if an Absolute Monarch promise to follow such a Rule, which hath a Power to use any which his reason shall dictate. Or if a Legall promise to abridge himselfe in a course, in which the Law hath left him indeterminate: in this respect, they come under a morall limitation. But concerning this positive meane we must note. 1. This promise, how solemne soever it be, must be a simple bond: It must extend to no diminution of power, or discharge from duty of subjection; for then it is not meerely morall, it makes the exceeding act not only sinfull, but non obliging: whereas it is the note of a meere morall bond, that it extends not to any lessening of Authority, or discharge of duty: as if a Captaine take his enemy prisoner; he to save his life sweares him a full vassalage afterward, his Master promises to command him only such services, never absolving him from his former bond of absolute slavery: here is a morall bond; yet still a full debt of subjection in case the Master should breake his word, and put him on other employment. 2. If the matter be more throughly looked into, this positive meane of limitation is either none at all; or else addes nothing to the former, of the morall law of God: For in such promise or Oath whereby a Governour limits himselfe there is an expresse or tacite condition, if it conduce to the end of Government, the glory of God, and publick good: For if such Oath or bond hinder the end of Government, it is eo nomine, unlawfull and invalid; but if conduce to it, then it was no more, then was virtually required of him before by the morall Law; this promise or Oath being but a more solemne profession and protestation to doe that which before implicitely he was bound morally unto. Thus we see all that Doctor speakes of Morall and irrevocable limitation by promise and oath comes to nothing in the issue: so that this being granted that the Monarchs power in this State were only Morally limited in the Doctors sense; We are as much under and owe as much subjection as the captive slave to his Master; and all our Laws and Statutes being but morall limitations of this second sort, are not so much as morall limitations any farther then the Prince sees them conduce to the end of Government, if any seem to stand in his way, and hinder him therein, he is no longer bound to it; but may account it an ill made promise or Oath which is better broke then kept. 2.Causes of Legall limitation. Of the Causes and Meanes of Civill and legall limitation, whereby not only the exercise, but the power it selfe is confined. 1. The formall cause hereof is the limitation of the duty of subjection in the people: The duty of subjection is the originall of the power of Authority. People by becomming debtors of subjection doe set up Authority; and by stinting and terminating the duty of subjection doe put bounds and termes to the power of commanding. 2. Let us see then by what meanes the duty of subjection may be terminated. I conceive it may be done two wayes. 1. At first, when a people resigning up themselves to a state of subjection doe it not absolutely, but impose only a limited bond on themselves; for if they impose no more duty: the Governour can assume no more power. Now this may be done, not only by positive, expresse and notorious act, as the Doctor speakes; but also by a negative; a meere not imposing of an absolute bond of duty on themselves is enough: so that if it cannot be proved either by records of the first institution, or present obligation that a people have put themselves into a state of absolute subjection, then it is to be held but limited: For whatsoever is ours by the law of nature, cannot be taken from us but by some positive act done by our selves or Ancestors: Thus in private men; Liberty which is mine by nature, none can take from me, unlesse he can bring a title or right whereby it became his, and I his servant. Nor am I any farther his servant, then he can bring proofe of his right. The same is true of a society of men. In this case it belongs to the challenger, and not to the defendent to bring his positive notorious act for proofe of his title, and measure of his title: So that the Doctors demand is unreasonable, who standing for a full right in our Government, puts on the peoples part to bring evidence that they have not. Rather it is just, that he should bring some positive and notorious act wherein it appeares that this people have fully resigned up their liberty to an absolute Government; or make it appeare that it is Gods ordinance that where ever a people doe constitute a soveraigne power, they must make an absolute resignation of their liberty. 2. By after-condescent, for this may be a meane of civill limitation, unlesse any will imagine that a people once putting themselves into absolute subjection, are irrevocably so. And thus a Monarch becomes limited, when the promise or Oath he limits himselfe by, is not simple, but amounts either expressely or equivalently to a relaxation of the bond of subjection: whether it proceed from meere grace, or conscience, of equity, or by Petition, or importunity of the people, it matters not what was the ground of it, if it carry with it a relaxation of the dutie of subjection, it is a meane of civill limitation, in the very root of power; for power can be no larger in the Prince, then duty of subjection is in the people; for these two have a necessary dependence, and relation of equality either to other. Thus if a Monarch, taking advantage of force of armes, impose a new Oath of full subjection on his people, who before were but legally bound; and prevaile so farre, that the whole or major part of his people doe take it for themselves and theirs, here is a chang of Government from Legall into Absolute, an enlargement of power: so on the contrary. And for this matter we need looke no farther, then the Nationall Oath, or Established Lawes; for if they bind the people to an absolute subjection; such is the power; and though it have morall, yet it hath no legall limitation: And so on the contrary if they bind only to a subjection according to the Law; the Government is limited in the very power of it. Hence it appeares to be false which the Doctor hath, p. 16. that a Monarch may so tye himselfe as to require not to be subjected to but according to such Lawes, and yet not be civilly limited, in his very power; for if he so far require not to be subjected to, that he untye the bond of subjection beyond those Lawes; then is his Authority limited, and can proceed no farther; neither are the instruments of his will exceeding those lawes, authorized, but private persons, and resistible: And also false, which he sayes, p. 28. That limitation by condescent cannot be radicall. Now if enquiry be made concerning the simplicity of antient formes of assuming into soveraignty, as when the people are said to make one King; to endue him indefinitely with Kingly power; not confining his Government by any expresse limitations. Ans. I conceive in such case to know how far a people are bound by such an indefinite contract, these things are to be looked into. 1. If the intent of the people can be discovered in such a constitution, for if it can, doubtlesse the contract binds so far, and no farther. Thus Lyra concludes concerning the request of the people of Israel for a King, that it is to be understood of an Absolute King, by that clause in the petition, 1 Sam. 8. 5. a King to judge us like all the Nations, for all those Easterne Nations having Absolute Monarchs, they desiring to be governed like them; must be conceived to intend such a government. 2. If there be no expression of their intention: then a light concerning it must be borrowed for circumstances; sc. the kind of government whereunto they have been formerly accustomed; or that of the Nation from which they proceeded: And thus the Saxons giving Kingly state to their Captaines in this Land, cannot in reason be interpreted to intend any other, then that whereunto they were accustomed, and which was the forme of the Nation whence they came. This Rule is ever to be kept as well in publike, as in private contracts of that simple indefinite forme, that they are to be construed, as far as may be, in fovour of the granter.


Chap. V. An Answer to the Sect. 4. concerning the Constitution of this Monarchy.

Sect. 1.A Fourth sort of the Doctors supposals are concerning the Constitution of this Monarchy, which in words he granteth to be limited and mixed, but comming to explaine himselfe, he makes such a limitation of it and such a mixture as is indeed none at all, being to be found in the most Absolute and simple governments in the world: for he every where supposeth it limited only morally in the exercise, not in the power: And so mixed, that there is but one simple power; a mixture made of one simple principle, such a one as never was heard of in the world before. And this he delivers on his bare word, never bringing any proofe of it, thinking it enough if he can except against that which I have set downe concerning these things in my Treatise. Among other Assertions which I have there about the state of this Government: there are two which this Replyer doth oppose. One is p. 31. That the soveraignty of our Kings is radically and fundamentally limited: which I have made good by five Arguments, and added a solution to the two chiefe which may be made against it. The other is, p. 39. That the Authority of this Land is of a compounded and mixed nature in the very root and constitution of it. This I have confirmed by three Reasons; and have answered three Objections which may be made against it. Now I desire the Reader impartially to weigh what I have there said; and to compare it with this Doctors Reply; and then judge whether those truths stand not firme against all that is brought to infringe them. But let us see what he opposeth. He proceedes not in any orderly course, to set downe his Antitheses and prove them; and to give Answer to what I have brought on the contrary; but first spends some time in considering what this Government was in its Originall; as if it must needs remaine still such as it was at first; and could not receive any alterations, and graduall accomplishment in processe of time. And then he sets on my Arguments, but how feebly we shall easily discover.

Here the first thing I did tax in the Doctors booke, was that he affirmed things contradictory: for he tells us he is against Absolute power in our Kings; and arbitrary Government: And yet he also affirmes, that our Kings hold by right of conquest, yea of three conquests. And that the Houses of Parliament are more subject to our Kings, then the Senate of Rome was to their Emperours. Also that the finall judgement is in One. Now how these so openly contradictorie Assertions can stand together he doth not shew us. Only he challengeth my ingenuity, if either he proposed this as a conclusion to be proved, that our Kings are absolute, p. 21. Neither doe I affirme that he did: Only I say, he holds things contradictory; that he holds such grounds which make all Kings absolute, sc. that no supreme is or can be more then morally limited. Indeed he speakes much of limitation morall; of limitation in the exercise of power; this makes a great noise of limitation, but indeed are but meere vailes to cover over Absolutenesse, and make it the more passable, which he is ashamed to propose to the world in expresse termes. Suppose he did not mention those conquests to win an arbitrary power to the King. Yet sure in affirming more then once, that he hath such a right, he doth as much as if he said he may use an arbitrary power if he will; for if he hath a right of Conquest, he hath an Arbitrary right, by the Doctors own confession, p. 22. and if he hath a right of Arbitrarinesse, it is his lenity he doth not use it. In the Answer to the first Argument which I brought for the Absolutenesse of our Kings (which was that They hold by conquest, and therefore are Absolute.) I do not say, the Doctor drawes such a conclusion: No; but he layes down the Antecedent; and then any body else may draw out the conclusion.

Originall of this Monarchy.I fetch not the root of succession, so farre backe as the Saxons, as this Replier traduces, to cut off advantages which may be made from the Normans entrance, p. 22. But because himselfe began there to make up a Trinity of Conquests: This drew me on that discourse of the Originall of this Monarchy; nor that the cause had any need of it; for it is his work to prove the Government absolute, if he will have it so; also suppose it were as absolute as the Norman Conquest, by him improved can make it; yet that hinders not, but that it may become really and radically limited afterward, by condescent, as appeares in the former chapter. Concerning the Saxon entrance, I said it was not a conquest, sc. properly and simply, but an expulsion. He answers, This is neither true, nor greatly materiall, p. 22. I say, it is both true and materiall: It is true; for all the Britaines which retained their name and Nation, were they many or few, were expelled into Wales: All the rest in gentem, leges, nomen, linquamq, vincentium concesserunt; as himselfe cites for me out of Mr Cambden. And it is very materiall; for if they which only remained here in gentem & leges vincentium concesserunt; Then the Conquerers, as I said, kept their old firme of Government; the Saxons came not into the condition of the conquered Brittaines; but they into the old liberty of the Saxons. Hereupon grew there a necessity of inquiry into the Government of the Nation, before they came hither; that so we might know what a one they established here; and brought the remaining Brittaines into. And a record of more unquestionable authority then Tacitus I could not imagine; nor a more expresse testimony for a limited forme in the very potestas of it; of which sort he affirmes the Governement of all the Germane Nations was. How ever the Doctor is pleased to call it a conjecture, a dreame and uncertainty; No, the expresse testimony of such an Authour is not so: Rather that probability of these Saxons not being then a people of Germany, but did afterward breake out of the Cimbrica chersonesus, is so; which himselfe dares call no more then a probability. I say, 1. It is a greater probability, that they were a people of Germany before they came in hither; for the Angli which accompanied them in that invasion, were questionles Germanes, and reckoned by Tacitus among that people, doubtlesse they were neighbours in habitation which were joyned in that voyage and conquest. 2. Suppose the matter were not cleare of the Saxons, yet is it of the Angli which gave denomination to the Land and people, who no doubt retained their Laws and Government, sayes Cambden; which was limited in the very royall power saith Tacitus. But this Doctor would make men believe, as if I endeavoured to deduce the very Modell of our present Government from that Saxon ingresse: Whereas all that I ayme at, is to make it appeare that in semine, in the rude beginnings it is so ancient; and shall affirme the limited power of the English Kings, and liberty of the subjects to have been from thence continued till now, unlesse he can bring some better proofes of its interruption, and induction of an unlimited power, then as yet he hath. Also to shew that the Doctors Tenure by Conquest is vaine in the first of the Three, for the Saxons gave none such to their Princes, but kept their Lawes, and came not under the Title of a conquered people. Next, the Doctor censures my delineation of the present platforme of our Government, p. 44. (for it is nothing with him for advantage to skip over 9. or 10. Pages) that so he might make a shew as if I set down that modell as derived from the Saxons out of Germany; and so spends neere two pages in this unreasonable way of traducing me; Whereas he cannot be ignorant, that in many places, yea at present is forced to confesse, p. 24. that I acknowledge our Government came up to this exactnesse and full height by degrees and in continuance of time; but indeed he had nothing else to say against that Description of this platforme or any one of those 6. Supposals of which it consists; and therefore when he had fained as if I had derived it from the beginning of the Saxon Government in this Land, he calls it a phansie, against the credit of all Histories and Chronicles, p. 24. and so lets it goe. Let the Reader judge, whether I doe not there apparently set it down as a description of our now existent Frame of Government: And whether any thing therein is not according to past historie, and present experience: Yea I challenge the Doctor to except against the least part of it, as not so: if he cannot, he doth wrong so to miscall and deride it. After this Excursion, he returnes back to the 36. page of my Book, and the proper businesse of that Chapt. which was his three Titles by Conquest. I looked that after his first, he should have made good his second Conquest, sc. the Danish, and made good what he had said, that our Kings hold by that too, as one of the three. But not a word of that for shame: He passes p. 26. to the Norman entrance: And to prove that William held this Land by conquest, he cites out of Mr Cambden that in victorie quasi Tropheum, he disposed of the Lands of the Conquered, changed their &illegible; abrogated what English Lawes and customes he pleased, &c. Indeed when he had gotten full possession, he did what he pleased; but sactum non probat jus. I have proved, and the Doctor hath not gain-said, 1. That his Title by which he claimed was a successive and Legall Title. 2. That this Title got the favour of a great party, and was a maine Meane facilitating his acquirie. 3. That he was inaugurated by virtue of that Title. 4. After he had gotten the Kingdome, though he did many things arbitrarily, yet he setled himselfe and his successours in the state of Legall Monarches, as the Doctor confesses, p. 27. What then is become of his Triple Tenure by Conquest; when heres not one can be made good; when it comes to a due scanning? That of Mr Cambden, that the Kings of this Land have Potestatem supremum, & merum imperium, is no more then that of the Statute which the Doctor speakes of, p. 47. that it is an Empire governed by one supreme head, which we acknowledge; for that merum imperium must be understood in a moderate sense; else it sayes more then the Doctor himselfe professes to own: Though Mr Cambdens judgement in this case is not of the authority of a proofe.

Sect. 2.Then he passes to my Arguments, p. 28. But, by the way, let me tell him, I brought 5. Arguments to prove this Government limited, and 3. to prove it mixed: and it had been meet he should have brought somewhat, beside his bare word,My Arguments for Limitation and Mixture vindicated. to prove it limited only in the exercise, that is, Absolute in the power; but he brings no proofe, because he had none: Yet perhaps though he had not wherwithall to confirm his own, yet he hath to demolish my Assertions: Let us see therefore his solutions of my Arguments. But before we come to weigh them, because he tells us p. 28. it were an Argument sit for a skilfull Lawyer to labour in, and slights my endeavour because I bring not History and Antiquity, but doe goe about to reason him into a beliefe of those Assertions, Let me premise something concerning that course of proving them. 1. The work of bringing History and Antiquity doth belong to him who affirmes such a Title of Power in our Kings; Let him shew how and when it was conveyed to them: He which challenges a right to that which was once undoubtedly mine, must prove his right and he can have no more then he can bring evidence for. 2. On his desant, if I undertake a needlesse office to prove my Negative, there are but two wayes imaginable to doe it, one is by records of histories setting out the first constitution of a state, and the Termes on which &illegible; people resigned up their liberty to a subjection. So in the Antient Romane State, the Venetian, the late Belgik Union, and others which have at once, visibly and lately been composed, it is likely that way might be taken. The other is by demonstrative collections drawn from the institution of the present composure of a State. Thus alone is it possible to discerne and prove the constitution of a Government which springs not up at once, but by unseen degrees and moments, whose fundamentall constitutive acts stand upon no record. This is the condition of most Governments in the world which have sprung from small, rude and unknown beginnings. And of this in particular. For 1, A limitation of Royall Power was brought hither by the Saxons and Angli our Ancestours, hath been proved. This was, as those times were, very rude and unpolished, it is likely such as Captaines in Armies have, who can doe nothing of moment without the advise and consent of the Counsell of warre. 2. This Limitation of Power and Libertie received some more formall and setled bounds afterwards by customes and Lawes before the Conquest, as appeares by the Common Lawes, which are, as it were, the basis and foundation of this Government, the Statute Lawes being but after superstructives; These Common Lawes did not grow up at once, but by degrees, and were unwritten Customes and Usages gaining authority by unknowne prescription, above all written Lawes; and were afterward committed to writing by men skilfull in the Lawes. 3. At length, and after the Conquest it was perfected to this Parliamentarie Forme; and even this being at first but rude, grew to this exactnesse by length of Time, and infinite Contentions. This latter way only being left us; that I took, and the Doctour hath no cause to despise it. For when a thing of present State is made evident by Reason drawne for palpable experience of it’s present composure, it is madnesse to denie it to be so, because I cannot tell when it began to be so: Yea when the Question is of present state, it is a surer way to find out the Truth, then by records of its Originall constitution: For in time the Frame of a State may receive reall variations from what it was at first, as the Romane State, and most others have done; for the contracts of men are at pleasure alterable; and an argument drawne from Monuments of first coalition, would then be fallacious.

Well; be the way never so justifiable, which I have taken, yet the Doctor dares pronounce my Arguments insufficient to cleare what I have undertaken. Tis easie to pronounce it; let us see how he makes good his sentence. I proceeded distinctly first to lay down my Arguments proving Limitation, p. 31. Then those which proove Mixture, p. 40. He mingles them together: And to my first, third, fourth and fift proving Limitation, Answers that They prove only limitation in the exercise of power, p. 28. Why so? Neither the Denomination of Liege, nor any prescription can make us believe, that the Limitations of power had any other beginning then voluntary condescent. As if a Government by voluntarie condescent might not receive a radicall Limitation. But it lies on him to proove, it was by such condescent; if he can bring no record for it, it must in justice be held originall, and ab initio. Those two denominations of Leige Soveraigne: And Liege people doe prove the very Soveraignty and Subiection Legall; but that is not so which hath only a morall Limitation; the denominations argue the bond ’twixt them to be Legall: And when Subjects have such a Libertie by custome and Law, that they owe no farther subjection, then (when, or how ever they came by it) yet the very power of the Monarch is limited, as we heard in the former Chapter, unlesse any will put a vaine power in the Prince, to which no Subjection is due; but of this enough there. Then he passeth to my Reasons proving mixture, which are three, p. 40. of my Treatise. The first is, That it is confessedly mixed of a Monarchie, Aristocracie and Democracie, therefore radically, and in the very Power. He answers, It is not necessarie the mixture should be in the Power: but it is sufficient if there be a concurrence of Persons whose consent is required to the exercise of Power, p. 29. Thus he answers to the conclusion; but sayes nothing to the Antecedent. 1. And indeed if it be mixed of these three, his answer is against common-sense; that a mixture of Monarchie, Aristocracie and Democracie should be satisfied by annexion of persons to the Monarch, having meere consent: for these are names of Power of Government; for Aristocracie and Democracie are Powers not Persons, as well as Monarchie: therefore a composition of these three must be all of Powers. 2. And indeed this chimera of a mixture in the exercise of Power, is plaine non-sense. For a mixture in the Acts or Exercise supposeth a mixture in the principles of Action, that is in the very Powers: A mixt Act proceeding from a simple Power is such stuffe that I never heard before. Now if a mixture in Acts argues a mixture in Powers: These Powers must be coordinate and supreme: for subordinates make no mixture; also Powers concurrent to supreme Acts, such as Legislation is confessed to be, cannot be but supreme Powers. Neither can any man living cleare that passage which he speaks of p. 45. from pure non-sense, sc. This coordination is but to some Act or Exercise of the Supreme Power, not in the power it selfe: For Concurse to an Act, implies a Power of Concurrence: and Concurse to a supreme Act, argues a supreme Power; for an inferiour Power cannot afford a coordinate concurrence to a supreme Act. So that his Over-seers were not mistaken when they checked him for that passage, and said, He granted a coordination of Subjects with his Majestie in the supreme Power. But here he brings a ponderous Reason, so often before urged. If the mixture be in the Supremacie of Power, how can the King be the Only supreme and Head. He cannot salve it with his Apex potestatis, unlesse the King must be the Crowne or Top of the Head onely; for they also must be our Head and our Soveraignes, if they be mixed in the Supremacie of Power, p. 29. Here I answer once for all to this so frequent an injection. 1. That the Titles of Head and Supreme are fully satisfied by this, that he is the sole Principle and fountaine from whence the execution of all Law and Justice flowes to his people by inferiour Officers and Courts, all whose Authoritie is derivatively from him as its head. 2. That these Titles in proper construction import only Utmost chiefty, nor doe they agree to any kind of right in the fundamentall and radicall Powers of a Kingdome; but to the principall and transcendent Interest: Another may have a right in the supreme Power, yet not be supreme, nor Head: because not having a supremacie in that Power: So it is in the Colledges, the Fellowes have a fundamentall interest in the power of Government, yet that hinders not, but that the Title of Head and Chiefe is given to him who is Governour; will the Doctour jest at it, and say they be Heads and Supremes too, and the Warden or Master is but the crowne or top of the head. Also in the naturall bodie, from whence the Memphor of Head is borrowed, are three Fundamentall and radicall powers seituate in the three Principall parts: yet none will say, the Heart and Liver are Heads too, because they partake the supreme Powers of nature. Let not the Doctour therefore straine a Memphor so farre as to make himselfe merry with it. Let him really answer my Arguments by which I prove a radicall Limitation and mixture. Let him answer; is not the Legislative Power the supreame? Have not the Houses an Authoritative concurrence and Influx into that businesse? If he avoyd a punctuall answer hereto by carping at words, he will prove himselfe a ridiculous Argumentatour while he seekes to make others seeme so.

My second Argument for radicall mixture, is from the Legislative Power being in all three. He answers, That Phrase is satisfied and explained by that concurrence and consent in the exercise of supreame Power. It seemes that invention of his must serve all turnes. Is a Legislative Power satisfied by a bare powerlesse consent? I demand: is that Consent causall and Authoritative; or meerly Consiliarie and unauthoritative? And whereas I prove that they have an enacting Authority by that received and set clause in the beginning of Acts; Be it enacted by the Kings most excellent Majestie, and the Authoritie of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament. He tels us a Vote and Power of assenting is a great Authority, p. 29. I enquire not how great it is: I aske whether that be all; whether that clause, which as expressely as words can, ascribes an enacting Authority to them, be satisfied by such a Power of Assenting? He sees it doth not, and therefore tels us of a former phrase which ran thus: The King by the advise and assent of the Prelates, Earls and Barons, and at the instance and request of the Commonaltie hath ordained, &c. Suppose anciently some statutes runne under that forme: that advise and instance, must be understood of an Authoritative and exacting advice and instance; as the latter formes explaine it: for it is equall that the latter expound the former; and not the contrary, as the Doctor would perversly have it, especially considering the Doctors Exposition cannot stand with the latter; but mine agrees very well with the former. But how bold is this man, when during so many yeares and Parliaments, both Kings and States by this received Forme, have acknowledged and established a concurrent enacting Authoritie in all three, yet he dares argue and oppose so expresse and confessed a truth? But in this answer, he discovers a great deale of superficialnes, in granting the Houses a Power of consenting to the establishment of laws; and yet denie them a Legislative, enacting Power: for such a Power of consenting (if it be necessary) is indeed a Power of enacting; for though in transeunt Acts one may stand by and consent to the doing, and yet not be Efficient; yet in imminent Acts which are done, per &illegible; volitionem, by a meere expression of the Will, A concurrence in consenting, and a concurrence in doing is one and the same thing: Now Legislation is an imminent Act, consisting in a meer expression of an Authoritative Will.

My third Argument for Mixture, was from it’s end, which was Restraint from excesse. 1. He grants such a Restraint, but morall and legall, not forceable, p. 30. I answer, He deceitfully confounds morall and legall, as I shewed before. 2. The End of Mixture in a State, is that there may be a power of restreyning more then sufficient (as his Majestie expresses it) but the Doctors meere morall power, is very insufficient; It limits not the Power at all; nor the Exercise properly, no more then an Oath, or Promise without it, would doe: that is, makes it sinne to exceed. But of this before. But here, which is very rare, He doth not onely denie, but give a reason of it. If the fundamentall Constitution had intended them such a Power, it would not have left a power in the Monarch to call, or dissolve them, which would make this power of theirs altogether ineffectuall, p. 30. This Reason seemes to have some weight in it, I will therefore, the more seriously consider it. 1. Whatever strength it hath had in it; now it hath none, because that power of dissolving is now by Law suspended, for this Parliament; and after it, a necessity by Law imposed of reducing that Power of Calling Parliaments, into Act, every Three yeares. 2. Neither was it true before these Acts, that such a Power was left in the Monarch at pleasure to use or not; for it was by ancient Law determined how often they should be convocated. 3. But being granted that this Power is simply and fully in the Monarch, yet I denie, that hence it followes, that it would make that Power of the Houses altogether ineffectuall; because that de facto, though it hath been in the Monarch so long, yet it never hath made it voyd; but they have exercised a limiting Power, as Histories relate, enough yea and sometimes too much, over the Monarch, notwithstanding his Power of calling and dissolving them. Thus in the Colledges, the Fellowes have an effectuall, and more then morall limiting Power, though the Governour hath the Power of calling and dissolving their meetings. And anciently the prime Patriarch had the power of Calling and dissolving generall Councels, yet they had a Power of limiting, yea of Censuring him for exorbitances for all that. The Reason is, because many things fall out oft in a Government, inducing such necessities on the Monarch, that he for their supply will choose to reduce such power into act of Calling, and suspend such power of dissolving, although he know those States will use their Limiting Power in reducing such exorbitances, and punishing those dearest instruments which have been used in them. This the Constitutors of this Frame preconsidering might put in the Monarch this Power, and yet intend to the other States a Legall and effectuall power of restraining his exorbitancies, by using Force, not against him, but it’s procurers and Instruments. Thus we see, there is no need of entring on that dispute, Whether this Power of calling and dissolving the Houses &illegible; placed in the Monarch, as all his other are, not absolutely, but with limitation of necessary reducing it into act, on the last exigencies of the Kingdome.

After this he returns to my other Arguments for limitation; One of which, drawne from radicall Mixture, he fully omits; but now having showed the invalidity of his exceptions against my arguments for it, I have given force to this argument for Limitation, drawne therefrom. That which he sets on last is my first for Limitation in the very Power: sc. the Kings owne expresse confession: That the Law is the measure of his power: That the Powers which he hath are vested in him by Law. p. 31. of my Tract. And, as if this were hot more then he could answer, the Doctor addes a third &illegible; in which he ascribes to the Houses a power more then sufficient to restraine his Excesses, p. 30. Here are Authorities as punctuall and expresso as can be imagined. Yet the Doctor resolving not to be reasoned into a beliefe of these things, out faces all this evidence; and to that end frames three Answers such as they are. 1. He sayes, His Majestie had few of his learned Counsell about him. 2. His gracious expressions ought not to be drawne out to his disadvantage. 3. All that can be gathered from them doth not come up to these Conclusions, p. 31. In the two first he openly enough taxeth his Majestie or unadvised expressions, excusing it from absence of his learned Counsellours (you may soone imagine whom he meanes) Thus disparaging the Kings judgement and all then about him; and tels us we must not be unjust to let those sayings on the racke; that is, we must not tuke them in their plaine meaning; but on this mans wrested and sencelesse interpretation: What due not these men dare doe and say? Before we heard him correcting the expressions of all Moderne Parliaments, teaching us to reforme them by the old. Here the King and his &illegible; setting out in such a time Declarations to all his Subjects to &illegible; them about the nature and extent of his Royall Power: He compares those serious expresses to Trayant sudden and excessive speech: He will correct Kings, Counsels, Parliaments and all, but he will have his way: To him they must come to learne how to speake, and what powers they have. But let us heare his Doctorall Exposition of his Majesties expresses. Hee sayes, The Law is the measure of his Power: Wee must understand his meaning to be that his power is bounded by Law: but it doth not follow, that his power wherein it is not &illegible; by Law is not absolute and full, p. 31. Here is profound interpreting. If his Power &illegible; limited by Law? is there any part of it not limited by Law? If the Law be the measure of it, sure it is even with it; for the measure is equall in extent with the thing measured: Thus he &illegible; interprets against the direct meaning of the Text: But he doth not &illegible; how that can be understood, when no faith, His powers are vested in him by Law, if the Law be a limitation only of exercise: Nor how their Restraining power is more then sufficient; if it be only morall; which, how unsufficient a restraint for exorbitance it is, every &illegible; experience can though testifie. I admire a man who pretends to conscience and judgement should take such liberty of interpreting. Certaine if those Reasons and Testimonies doe not clearly &illegible; &illegible; limited and mined Constitution of this Monarchy I shall despair of ever proving any thing by way of Argument any more.

Sect. 3.I had an intent to have subnexed other Arguments to make good those Assertions: but I see it is to no purpose, for he is resolved not to be reasoned into them:7 Queries concerning this Governement. He can denie all as failing &illegible; in the &illegible; or Consequent, p. 32. The Power of this Kingdome he must have unlimited: He will give no Reason for it; nor heare no Reason against it. Yet, fath he professeth himselfe a Resolver of Conscience, Let me therfore be so bold as to propose certaine Cases to him. 1. Why in the late Oath proposed to be taken by all his Majesties Subjects the Power of enacting Statutes is sworne to be joyntly in the Kings Majestie, Lords and Commons in Parliament. Certes the Doctor writ this Reply before that Oath was printed in Oxford, or else he did not consider of it. He cannot say, I hope there were but few of his counsell about him when that was framed: if the Doctor hath taken it, He hath for sworne this passage of his Reply; and sworne them a joynt enacting power. 2. Why we are enjoyned to sweare that we doe beleeve that the Subjects of England are not obliged by any Act made either by the Kings Majestie solely, or the Houses solely, &c. Sure the Doctor hath abjured his other Assertion of the unlimited Power of the King, if he hath taken this Oath; for if Power be solely his, then an Act made by him solely is obliging: If they be not obligaturie, they are not Authoritative; and so the mixture and limitation is in the Authority it self. Here is no place left for his distinction of Active and Passion subiection. For 1. Will any thinke that the intent is to sweare men to be bound not to doe, but to suffer? 2. The Beliefe of a non-Obligation &illegible; in differently and as fully concerning the sole Acts of the King, &illegible; the Houses but I beleeve the Doctour will not say we are obliged to passive subiection to the sole Acts of the Houses. 3. I would know if the States doe limit onely morally, what they doe, which is not done without them. A Promise and Oath do limit morally without them. He will say they may admonish him; and denie their &illegible; and so &illegible; his Acts invalid: He meanes still morally invalid; and so would they be without them. 4. Suppose the Monarch minded to establish a Law, which he judges needfull; and the States being averse, he enacts it without them; Is it not a Law? It hath all the Legislative authoritis in it. He will say it is not duly made. 1. I grant it: but yet it is a Law, for it hath all the Power of a Law. 2. But is it not duly made? Why, the power of last decision is the King alone: Suppose he define that the Intent of his Predecessours in granting this consenting power to the Houses had no intent to hinder, but further themselves in establishing good lawes; and therefore now they not concurring by assent to this needfull Act, He ought not to be hindred, but may lawfully doe it without them. He is the last Judge in this case; and it must be held ever lawfully enacted. So that in the result here is left to these States by the Doctors grounds neither Civill nor Morall Limitation, but at pleasure. 5. If Limitation in our Government exempt Subjects from a necessity of active Subjection; but not from passive; How is it that our Lawes doe not only determine what the Monarch shall command, but also what he shall inflict: what shall be accounted Rebellion, what Felonie, &c. and what not; also what he shall inflict for this crime, and that crime, and what not? Sith the Lawes limiting what he shall command, doe limit our necessity of active Subiection; it will follow, that the Lawes limiting what he shall inflict, doe limit our necessity of passive Subiection. Here’s no evasion by saying the Laws do limit him morally what he shall inflict, and if he inflict beyond Law, he sinnes in it; but we must suffer: for the Doctor acknowledges, that the Lawes defining what he shall command doe so limit our active subjection, that we have a simple exemption from any necessity of Doing; and therefore also the Laws defining what he shall inflict, doe so limit our passive subjection, that we have a simple exemption from any necessity of suffering, beyond those Limitations; for also, if they did not free us from passive subjection, it were unlawfull not only to resist, but also to avoid suffering even by flight. 6. When the liberties of magna Charta, and other grants have been gotten and preserved, and recovered at the rate of so much trouble, sute, expence and blond, whither by all that adoe was intended only a morall liberty, definement in the Monarch, and not also of the power it selfe; only that he might not lawfully exorbitate from established Lawes, and not also that he might have no Authority or Power to exorbitate at all? Sure this was their aime, for the former he could not doe before. 7. The Law granting a writ of Rebellion against him who refuseth to obey the sentence of the Judge, thought he have an expresse Act of the Kings will to warrant him: doth it not suppose those exceeding and extrajudiciall Acts of the Kings will to be unauthoritative, and unable to priviledge a man from Resistance?

If the Doctor by his faculty can resolve these Cases, He will doe much in way of satisfaction of my conscience; but if he cannot they will prove so many convincing arguments that the Power of the Monarch in this Frame is not unlimited.

Now having made good my Assertions, I expected another worke; sc. an Examination of his Reasons for unlimitednesse, and simplicity of Monarchicall Power, but he is not guilty of my fault, he doth not goe so much as to reason us into a beliefe of it. He doth in vaine expresse a desire hee hath that some skilfull Lawyers or Divines would helpe him at this dead sift; yet he is like to goe alone in this wild untroden path of defending an unresistiblenesse on such supposals: shall we think any Divine will second him, in justifying his unwritten fancie about Gods Ordinance necessarily investing all the acts of his will, who is supreme? Or any sound Lawyer will overthrow the grounds of his Profession, that the Royall Right, Authority and Government of this Realme is both founded on, and measured by the Laws thereof. Yea it is very remarkeable, that his Majestie in all the Declarations and Expresses which I have seen, doth not once touch upon this way, sc. a challenge of such a latitude of Authority as can preserve destructive instruments from force; but condemnes the now Resistance, by solemne protestations of innocency, and intention of governing by the known Laws.


Chap. VI. An Answer to his 5. Sect. of Resistance in Relation to severall kinds of Monarchy.

Sect. 1.THE residue of his Book is spent about the Question of Resistance; I might well spare the labour of any farther Answer; for now having so apparently made good these two Assertions. 1. That soveraignty may be limited in the very power. 2. That defacte, it is so in this Government, every one may discerne the necessary truth of these inserences, 1. That in this Government, the exceeding Acts of the Princes will, being out of the compasse of his Authority, can not authorize their Instruments. 2. That hereon Resistance of them is no other then of private men, not of Authority, or Gods Ordinance. But because the Doctors chiefe confidence is in this part of his discourse, and he is large in it, I will therefore goe on in my work, and will briefly make appeare that his Reasons are infirme, and his Authorities impertinent, and his Answers very insufficient: for having been so large in making good my supposals, and overthrowing his, I may the more contract my selfe in this remaining businesse. In this Section he proposeth two things. 1. To consider how I state the point of Resistance in the kinds of Governments. 2. To prove that Limitation and Mixture in government doe not imply a forceable constraining Power in subjects, p. 39. I will follow him in both.

My stating the Question &illegible;He begins with a charitable censure of my stating the Question, and sayes he finds it to be in away that lies very open to Rebellion, p. 33. Let the Reader judge: I am sure, his Resolves and Determinations are not in a way to destroy all liberty, and make all Governments Arbitrary, but directly doe it. Then for my maintaining the Person of the Monarch in all Formes to be above the reach of Force, he approves it; yet sayes I allow subjects to raise Armies, to give battle to those that are about him as his guard. He wrongs me, I say not his guard but subversive seducers and instruments: Those which he called cutthroates in his first booke; now he repents he gave that hard name to his clients, whom he pleades so hard to save harmelesse, and makes them amends with the stile of a Guard. A guard which bring him into greater danger then all his enemies; who bring him into battell to save themselves, where Ordnance and Musket can put no difference: No; They use him as their guard. If harme befall him, which God avert, the guilt and punishment will fall on them who are so prodigall of hazarding his sacred Person, not on those who could desire nothing more then his security, by absence from a multitude, who by undertaking the subversion of Religion and Lawes (for that is the Doctors supposition) bring themselves in danger of condigne destruction.

Then he proceeds to Resistance in an Absolute State. Where I affirme, If such a Monarch should seeke the destruction of the whole Community, his instruments of such inhumanity may be resisted. He dares not deny it; but would know what I doe meane by the whole community. I meane the whole simely, or the whole interpretatively; that is, the greater part; and therefore his exception of the Jewes in the Kingdome of Abasuerus, or the Templers in the Westerne Kingdomes, is not to the purpose: but the instance which I bring of the Law-Countries, comes home: for they were the whole community; but the Replier corrupts it, when he saith the Spanish King intended the extirpation of the Protestants only, p. 34. For he intended not only theirs, but of all, Papists and else, which would not admit the introduction of an Arbitrary Government, and the subversion of their liberties, as the histories thereof make plaine. Here in this 34. page, the Doctor shewes a bad mind: Taking occasion to excuse the Rebels in Ireland, as if they might justifie themselves on these grounds; and intimating a falshood, as if the Parliament did intend their extirpation, hereby declaring how ill he likes any effectuall course for the rooting out of Popery out of the Kingdomes. Indeed, he sayes, he pleads not for them, but yet he doth it. He finds out arguments for them; and shews them a way, both how to excuse themselves, and accuse the Parliament; and to call a resolution of cleansing that Iland from Popery, an extirpation of their Nation. He sayes, the example of David proves not this, being but a particular Man. I say, it proves it the more strongly, as shall appeare. Then if a particular mans life be invaded without any plea of reason, I suppose it hard to deny him the liberty of positive resistance of agents; and prove it by the instance of the peoples rescue of Jonathan; and Davids of himselfe; where the peoples Oath; and Davids Army, with his enquiry at Keilab doe prove a serious and reall purpose of Resistance, let the Doctor say what he please to the contrary; so that these examples come home to justifie resistance in such case, even in an Absolute Monarchy; for here are particular men, in an absolute Monarchy, assaulted without plea of reason; for that Jonathan, who had wrought such a deliverance, should die, for tasting in his ignorance a little honey, there was no colour of reason; the Kings rash oath was none. And that David should be put to death, whom Saul himselfe oft with his own mouth professed innocent, and absolved, was as much without plea of reason: so that here I need not flie to the Doctors shift of an extraordinary case, as he tells me I must, p. 35. I acknowledge no extraordinary case in these examples: Take them in their due extent, and they justifie no more then I have asserted; and so much they doe. In my 5. Assertion, p. 12. Of submitting States, Liberties and Persons to the will if an Absolute Monarch carrying any plea of reason; He faults my Order, and tells me, it should have been first. It seems this mans eye can spie small faults; but why first, he doth not say. I think in stating of the question of resistance I may as well begin with the Affirmative, and shew first when it may be used, and then when it ought not; as on the contrary; but he will make a fault, where he finds none. But what sayes he to the Assertion? He grants it; but dislikes the limitation, so it carry plea or shew of reason: and sayes here the way is open enough to rebellion, p. 36. No opener then himselfe makes it, p. 10. This is usuall with him, when he dislikes a thing: He can speak no lesse words then Rebellion. But why sayes he so? Every man will be ready to think there is no reason nor equity in the will of the Monarch when he is oppressed by him. He may well enough, if hee be oppressed: but yet there may be a plea and colour of equity even for an Act of Oppression; and in an Absolute Monarchy it will little availe a man though he think there is no reason for it: for he must not be his own judge; nor hath he any outward judge to appeale to; but the Reasonable will of the Monarch himselfe; if he submit to its determination, there is no feare of Rebellion; if not, I have done with him, in such a Government. Of Saules censure of Jonathan and David I have spoken already and made it appeare it had no plea of reason, was not the act of a reasonable will; and therefore I may hold their examples ordinary, without impeachment of this Assertion.

Then he proceeds to Resistance in limited and mixed Rules, p. 36. Concerning which I said, p. 17. If the exorbitances be of lesse moment they ought to be borne, and p. 18. If mortall and destructive neither can be otherwise redressed, then prevention by Resistance may be used. Here first he challengeth my ingenuity, for words spoken in my 49. page. He said Sect. 1. of his first booke, We may and ought to deny obedience to such commands of the Prince at are unlawfull by the Law of God; yea by the established lawes of the Land. I censured this speech, that it is more then should be said, sure, a hainous fault in me: I say more; he hath said more then should be said, by all these three bookes, in which he sayes that which dissolves all frames of Government into arbitrary, overthrowes all effectuall limitation of Power; and sure that is more then should be said. And for that particular clause; Is it not more? He speakes without restriction: Doth joyne things unlawfull by the law of God, and things unlawfull by the lawes of the Land: And puts the same may and ought to both; if the affirmation must be understood universally of one, how can it be understood otherwise of the other: It cannot be excused from the censure of a confused and unwary speech. He passeth, p. 37. to the Question, Who shall be the ultime judge of subversive exorbitancies. He would know who? I have told him my opinion hereof at large in that Tract: Here I would faine know his; but he would rather carp at mine, then give his own. When I say there can be no Authoritative judge to determine it. He commends my ingenuity, p. 37. but I doe not only say it, but at large doe prove it, there p. 67. as well against him, as against those others; why doth he not undertake that Question against me, if he hath any mind to it. He much dislikes when I say, p. 18. The fundamentall Lawes must judge in every mans conscience. This is, sayes he, a ready way to anarchy and confusion, p. 37. I referre not this case to the consciences of men as to an Authoritative Judge, but a morall principle of discerning Right: And who can deny unto man such a liberty to conceive of right according to the light he hath from the fundamentals of a State? Let the judicious reade what I have said here-about, p. 67. of that Tract; and let him then tell how that Question can be otherwise determined, unlesse he overthrow Monarchy, by giving a finall judgement to the States; or all Liberty, if he give it to the Monarch; and supposing the Ayme at subversion be evident to mens consciences, can we deny them a naturall power of judging according to that evidence; or liberty of assisting the wronged? So when I say the wronged side must make it evident to every mans conscience: also the appeale must be to the Community, as if there were no Government; and as every man is convinced in conscience he is bound to give assistance, p. 29. of my Tract: He calls this good stuffe, p. 37. Why? because I say, the people are at liberty as if there were no Government; and this appeale is disadvantagious to the Monarch; for they will be more ready to believe their representative: This would in the consequence be dangerous, the high way to confusion, p. 38. Answ. 1. I say, not simply, that people are at liberty, as if there were no Government; but in this particular Question; bound still, as before, in all besides. 2. He takes me as if by Community I meant only the Commons; when I expresse it by genils humanum, especially of that Kingdome. 3. He censures the Reason of Man-kind of partiality towards their Representatives. Not so; for in so great a Question Wisemen cannot be blinded: Honest men will goe according to their conscience, and Reasonoble men according to evidence, and will see it concernes them as well to avoid Anarchy by aiding a wronged Monarch; as Tyranny by aiding an oppressed State. But sith this Replicant is so bitter an enveigher against an Appeale ad conscientiom generis humani, in this last case so uncapeable of an Authoritative decision: 1. Let him consider on what foundation God hath built Monarchy and all other powers, but on the consciences of men, Rom 13. 2. Let him weigh whether, when he hath said all he can say, such an appeale be avoidable. For, 1. If a controversie arise between the King and a particular person or place; the King shall Judge it in his Courts by his Judges, and the sentence shall be executed by the force and armes of his other subjects. 2. If it be between Him and the Representatives of his whole Kingdome, and supreme Court of Judicature in which the Acts and Persons of all other Courts and Judges are to be judged. The King cannot judge this in his other Courts and by his Judges; nor yet by himselfe; for a King out of his Courts cannot judge in a Legall Government, especially the acts of his supreme Court. But be it so: suppose the Doctor and I should agree in this, that the King by himselfe is the ultime Judge of Controversies: Yet it is very like those States with whom the Contention is, will not yeild him so, to judge against them, in his own cause. But suppose they doe not submit to his determination: He will say, then they sin, and rebell against him. Well, let it be granted; yet submit they doe not: I demand in this case, what course the King hath to make effectuall his sentence? It must be by force of armes, by the sword: but of whom? Either the peoples whose representatives they are; or other mens: but what shall bind them to afford their Force to make good his sentence? It must be their conscience of his right: Thus when all is done and said, To the consciences of Men must his appeall be; and to them must he make evident his right, in this extreme contention. Yea this man in a controversie of the like nature, is compelled to acknowledge as much: For the Pleaders put the case; If a King be distracted, I may adde, if his Title be dubious, &c. The Doctors answer is, if it be cleare that a King is so, &c. p. 8. but who shall determine this If? must not self-evidence in the consciences of Men? This is all the judiciall power the Doctour can referre us to in these cases. Lastly, He would know what power there is in a Community to make resistance; and answers himselfe, A Parliamentary and Legall; not Military and Forcible, p. 38. Thus he speakes of these as contradistinct, when they are subordinate, Forcible being subservient to Legall to make it valid and effectuall, which else were meerely morall and ineffectuall; but this is one of his supposals whose vanity I have before discovered: And p. 51. of my Treatise, in a full dispute have I proved the Parliaments power in resisting destructive instruments; which I doubt not, will appeare cleare, notwithstanding any thing said in this Reply. But that is very strange which he affirmes, p. 39. That if they use a Legall restraining power, the Monarch cannot alter the established frame. Sure, by cannot, he understands fallaciously, as he useth to doe, a morall cannot, that is, not without sin; which is a poor small cannot now adays: if he mean indeed cannot, that is, is not able, it is against reason, by his grounds; for what is not he able to doe, whose lowest, most desperate instrument of pleasure is unresistible? Let him remember where he said, p. 19. A forcible consent cannot be wanting to a Conquerour, and a Conquerours power is no more then unresistible. Nay; I am senselesse on the Doctors grounds, if he cannot lawfully; for suppose he be pleased to make it a Question, whether he were not better governe by the Civill-Law, as more conducent to Gods glory, and the end of Government. He is by Law the last judge of this Question, if he determine it best: then he may lawfully doe it.

Sect. 1.Now we are come to the second part of this Section: in which he undertakes the proofe of this Assertion,His Arguments against power of resistance reserved, answered. that Limitations and Mixtures in Monarchy doe not imply a forcible constraining power in subjects for the preventing of dissolution, but only a Legall, p. 39. Answ. He failes in the very proposall of his Assertion in three points. 1. He proposeth it of Limitation in generall; whereas I grant it of that which is only in exercise; affirming it only of that which is of the power it selfe. 2. He sayes, Forcible constraining power in subjects, when he should have specified against subversive instruments, for I grant it of the Monarch himselfe. 3. He opposeth forcible to Legall, when it should be opposed only to meere Morall, not to Legall, as before. Now let us weigh his Arguments. First, Such a power must be in them by reservation, and then it must be expresse in the constitution of the Government and Covenant, or else by implication. I will answer distinctly concerning this Reservation of power of forcible Resistance. 1. There is a Reservation of liberty, or power of not being subject neither actively nor passively to the exceeding Acts of the Monarchs will: This is by implication, for what they did not resigne up, they did reserve. 2. A power of Authoritative judging and resisting the Monarch thus exceeding. This neither expressely nor implicitly is reserved; not because it is unlawfull, as the Doctor imagins, but contradictory to the very institution of a Monarchy, and so, under that intention, impossible. 3. A power of forcible resistance of subversive instruments. This by the Authority of the Law, is, not reserved, but expressely commited, not only to the Houses of Parliament, but all interiour Courts; for the Law, whose execution the King committeth unto them, commands them not only to resist, but punish its violaters, much more its subverters, without exceptions of Persons, or respect of their number, or ground and reason why they doe it, whether with or against the Kings private and absolute will or Warrant: supposing such men to be without warrant. And this power of judging all violators and subverters of Laws being committed to them, includes a power of imploying the force or Armes of the County, or whole Kingdome, if need be, to make good the sentence of the Law against them; This power being a necessary attendant to the former. And they who have the power of judging by Commission, have the power of force by implication. To his five Arguments therefore by which he proves this power not reserved by implication; I briefly Answer. 1. Limitation cannot infer it, &c. Answer, Limitation in exercise only doth not: but in the power it selfe doth infer it, as I have often shewed. 2. The inconveniencies of exorbitancie cannot infer it. Answer, They doe not infer it of themselves, for they are the same in absolute Rule: but supposing a people mind in their Frame effectually to prevent those inconveniencies, that doth infer it. 3. The consent and intention of the people, choosing a Monarch cannot infer it, because it is not the measure of the power it selfe. Answer, I have before proved the contrary, and made the Doctors supposall appeare a groundlesse falshood concerning unlimited power by Gods ordinance. 4. The intention of the people in procuring Limitations of power cannot infer it. Answer, If the peoples intention in it, be a greater security from oppression then in an absolute Government they can have, or a meere morall limitation can give them; then it doth inferre it. 5. If the Architects did intend such a forceable power to these &illegible; they would not have left it in his power to dissolve them, p. 42. This hath had its full satisfaction before. These are poore infirme arguments, as the reader cannot but see, yet he ends in a triumph. Therefore I conclude here as I premised in the second Section, where the Prince stands supreme, &c. there Subjects may not by force of armes resist, though he be exorbitant, &c. p. 43. ’Tis true he concludes as he promised, but he hath riot proved, as he promised; nor as we expected; For here is nothing, but that which fals to the ground with his supposals on which they are built; and which I have demolished in the 4th Chapter.


Chap. VII. An Answer to the 7th Section of his Replie, of places of Scripture out of the old Testament.

Sect. 1.HIs sixt Section doth wholly concerne the Author of the fuller Answer, which I passe over, because I am chargeable for no more then is my owne. And come to his seventh which containes an Examination of places alledged in this Question out of the old Testament. Where he begins confidently that there is no warrant for Resistance, p. 56. and he yeelds two Reasons why. 1. Because the Institution of that Kingdom was such as doth plainly exclude Resistance. 2. Because the Prophets never call for it. Ans. I grant it doth exclude it, as farre as in an absolute Monarchie it may be excluded; and therefore there is no need of answering his Arguments. But yet let us consider them sith he is so large in them.

To shew us the Institution of that Kingdome he brings, 1. Sam. 8. 11. Where he sayes we have it. For Samuel is commanded, v. 9. To tell the people (Jus Regis:) Now this jus Regis he makes a great matter of, and tels us it implies not a Right of doing such unjust Acts, but a securitie from Resistance and force, if he does them, p. 56.

Ans. 1. It is no prejudice to the cause I defend, if I should grant all he would worke out of this Text; for it prooves no farther then of that particular Kingdome, inducing no necessitie that all others must have the same Institution. Also that which he concludes is but a securitie for the Person of the Prince from force if he doe such unjust Acts: which we grant him not only in that, but all Monarchies, even the most limited.

2. If he have any further reach, and would conclude out of it a generall binding Ordinance of security from Resistance extending even to subversive Instruments of Will. The world will wonder at him for such an audicious conclusion from such premises. And we will look a &illegible; nearer to what he sayes. All is grounded on his Interpretation of Jus Regis. Which he seeks to confirme by Calvins Authority.

First, for his Interpretation, I say the Originall words in this place are not to be translated jus Regis, the Right of the King. Because 1. There is another more fit signification of them: the words are משפטהמלו now the word פשפט being applied to unjust Acts, as here it is ought not to be rendred jus, but mos, not Right, but manner, as appeares by another place answerable to this, 1 Sam. 27. 11. וכה משפטו speaking of Davids roving, This will be his manner, ’t were ridiculous to render it, this will be his right or priviledge. This our last interpreters knowing, did willingly depart from the Vulgar Latine; whose Authour either ignorantly or inconsiderately did render it jus Regis; which this Doctour for his advantage doth here make so much of. 2. That rendring of it, cannot be justified by any other Text of Scripture; for whersoever it is rendred Jus, it imports a morall Right; not a priviledge or securitie in ill doing. I challenge any skilfull in that tongue to bring one place where it is or can be so rendred.

Then for Calvins Authority. I answer. 1. What if Calvin or any other deceived by the vulgar Latine, or ignorance of the extent of the Originall word, have rendred it ill; must that be a prescription to others who know a better? 2. Neither doth Calvin, though he follow the Latine and render it jus, meane such a jus as the Doctour doth, sc. An absolute immunity, or security from Resistance: but onely from private men. For after he hath in all those passages, which the Doctour cites, exempted Kings from violence, truly and piously urging patience in Subjects under the injuries of their Princes, at length Instit. l. 4. c. 10. (the same out of the which the Doctor brings his proofes) num. 31. He explaines himselfe, De privatis hominibus semper loquor, that all is to be taken of private men; not of the States of a Kingdome, in their publike meetings: never discerning of such a universall immunitie, as the Doctour would put upon him to maintaine. And here I challenge not the Ingenuity, but the Conscience of this Replier, who cites Calvin at large in the former place, as agreeing with him in this case of Resistance, when he cannot be ignorant of the contrary, and therefore conceales his following words in the 31. num. Where he expressely teaches the same Truth which I have asserted in my Treatise. Heare him speaking his judgement, De privatie hominibus semper loquor: Nam si qui nunc sunt populares magistratus ad moderandum Regum libidinem constituti (quales olim erant, qui Lacedemonijs regibus oppositi erant, Ephori, aut Romanis Consulibus, Tribuni plebis; aut Atheniensium Senatui, Demarchi; & qua etiam forte potestate (ut nunc res habent) funguntur in singulis regnis tres ordines, cum primarios conventui peragunt) adeo illos fenocienti Regum licentiæ pro officio intercedere non veto, ut si Regibus impotenter grassantibus, & humili plebeculæ insultantibus conniveant, corum dissimulationem nefaria perfidia non carere assirmem, quia populi libertatem cui se, Dei ordinatione, Tutores positos norunt, fraudulenter produnt. He is cleare, that the Estates in Parliament, not only may, but are Gods ordinance for it, and are bound to resist, and not suffer the destruction of liberties, by exorbitating Princes; so that I may justly retort the Doctors words, p. 57. There can be nothing spoken more plainly for the power of resistance in the Houses of Parliament then this.

Then for his other reason from the 18. verse, Ye shall cry out in that day, and the Lord will not heare you. As in my Treatise I called it inconsequent; so also now: He is a good Logician which can draw his conclusion out of those premises. But he blames me, p. 58. for saying it was an absolute Monarchy, and cannot see how it can be so, according to my description of absoluteness. Why not? In Absolute Monarchy, there are no limits but the Monarchs own will; but these had a fixed judiciall Law, p. 59. I answer, That judiciall Law was no limits of their power; but of the exercise only; for the non observance of it by the King did not amount to an untying of the bond of subjection in the people. The Judiciall Laws being from God, not from any contract of the people, were in the same nature to that people, and for the time, with the Morall Laws; and in the same manner did limit their Kings, and no otherwise. But for the Absolutenesse of that Monarchy, here Lyra (more faithfully cited, then he did Calvin above) Constitutio Regis juxta potestatem sibiconcessum est duplex.Lyra, in 1 Sam. 8. 1. Plena & &illegible; absoluta, prout legiste de Imperatore dicere solent. 2. Cum potestate &illegible; Now sayes he, the people sinned, not simply in asking a King; but in asking a King of the first sort, to judge them as the Nations, that is, absolutely. He is expresse. 1. That limitation of power makes a limited Monarch. 2. That Israel desiring such a Government as the adjacent Nations, desired an absolute Monarch. And indeed as the definement of the morall Law doth not disparage the Absolutenesse of the Monarch, because it is from God, not the people; so did not their judiciall, for the same reason.

Sect. 1.Next he comes to the peoples rescue of Jonathan, p. 60. He may give their resolute Oath what names pleaseth him, a loving importunate violence, a souldierly boldnesse, or the like; it was a peremptory expression of no lesse then an intent of resistance, in case there had been need. Then for Davids purpose in having armed men about him; He says it was only to secure his person against the cut-throates of Saul, that is, against his private Emissaries. But who sees not a large difference betweene securing a mans selfe from private Emissaries, and appearing in the field with Armies against the Armies of the Prince, p. 61. Answer, 1. It is against reason, that he should retaine an Army of 600. valiant Souldiers, yea a great Army, like the Host of God, 1 Chron. 12. 22. to secure himselfe meerely against private Emissaries. 2. Let us grant him that there is a difference between securing against private Emissaries, and the open Army: yet if he grant it lawfull to use force against one, he grants the cause by it, of all; for a warrant from an act of the Kings will is as valid to secure a few Emissaries, as a whole Army: and Gods Ordinance in one man, is no more resistible, then in a multitude. Then for Davids intent to keep Keylah against Saul, it is so evident, by the history; that I will say no more about it; but doe refer him to that which the Pleaders for defensive Armes say about it. The Doctor seeks divers evasions, to get out of the reach of this example; but doth not satisfie himselfe, much lesse others, and therefore adds the fourth on which he must rest when all is said, That Davids example was extraordinary: Hereon he brings some things in him which were extraordinary; We grunt it in many things; but we deny it in this. If the Doctor will prove him to have a speciall priviledge to resist Gods ordinance in his Soveraign, more then other men; he must bring the grait and warrant for it: otherwise David must come under the common condition for this matter: He himselfe acknowledges he had none for violating the person of his Prince; and sure then he had none for violating the Authority of his Prince, conferred on private Emissaries, it they had any. But in his p. 65. He layes hard at me, and challengeth not only my Reason for calling this a shufling Answer, but also my ingenuity, who confesse the people in that Government might not resist; and yet doe urge these examples for Resistance. Answer, 1. For my Reason: I have made it appeare I have reason to call it so; is it not a meere evasion, to affirme in him an extraordinary priviledge, and can bring no word, not warrant for it? 2. For my ingenuity it is without cause challenged by him; for from the lawfullnesse of Resistance of unreasonable Acts of will, in an absolute Monarchy, where Reason is the Princes law; I may a sortiori conclude the lawfulnesse of resisting of instruments of illegall Acts in a limited Monarchy, where the Law of the Land is the Princes Law and bounds.


Chap. VIII. The 8. Section concerning Resistance forbidden, Rom. 13. answered.

Sect. 1.NOw we are come to his principall strength against Resistance out of Rom. 13. From whence nothing can be collected against any Resistance, but that which is of the Powers, of the Ordinance: but that which I defend is of neither of them, therefore I have no cause to feare his inferences from that Text. Now supposing the truth which I have made good, that in a limited State the limitation is of the Power it selfe, and not only of the exercise; it &illegible; evidently that in such a State resistance of destructive instruments, is neither of Power nor Gods Ordinance. I might therefore well omit that which at large here he speakes of Resistance of the Powers. The first part of the Section is spent in replying to the Exceptions of the Reverend Divines. The first thing I find which concernes me is, p. 77. I will therefore begin with him there. Where he accuseth me that in my 59, 64, and 66. page of that Treatise, I grant, they might not resist in that Monarchy; but affirme that subjects may in this; and he brings me in giving two Reasons for it. 1. Because Religion was then no part of the Lawes, but here it is. 2. Because that was an Absolute Monarchy, this a Limited and mixed, p. 77. But may I not here challenge both the ingennity and conscience of this Replyer. Did I ever grant that Gods Ordinance of Power might be resisted here; or give my Reasons for so unreasonable an Assertion? It would be tedious to repeate here, what I have said there. Let the Reader see; if he please. I will recite the summe. 1. The Doctor affirmed, that in the Apostles time the Senate of Rome might challenge more then our Parliaments can now, I denied it, and gave my reason, sc. That State was then devolved into a Monarchy by Conquest, &c. of this the Doctor speakes not a word, perhaps he is now ashamed of that comparison. 2. He said, there was greater cause of Resistance then, than now. I answered. There was then no cause at all: Not for Religion, being then, no part of the Law: Not Liberties; because then that was past, the Government changed; and an Oath taken of absolute subjection. Have I by these things granted a liberty of Resistance of Gods Ordinance to this people; and deny it to those? No; Neither They, nor We; not that enslaved Senate; nor our free Parliaments, no cause, no priviledge can justifie this. Yea I ascribe more to Gods Ordinance of Power, then He: He sayes that in a limited &illegible; we owe only passive subjection to exceeding commands of a Prince by promise limiting himselfe in the use of his power. I say; though he sin in exceeding such promise; yet we owe him also Active obedience in such commands which Gods Law forbids us not to be Active in. Neither doe I bring Doctor Bilsons testimony to prove that Religion was then no part of the Law, as he affirmes I doe, p. 77. But sure he neither heeded what I had written, nor what himselfe wrote. I laid down an Assertion that Gods Ordinance of which St Paul speakes, is the Power and the Person of him which is supremely invested with that Power; and for this did I bring Dr Bilson; who, explaining the Power there forbidden to be resisted, sayes it is the Princes will not against his Lawes; but agreeing to his Lawes. Here he serves Dr Bilson and other Divines, as before the King, and the Parliaments, teaches them a meaning contrary to their words: They meane such states as may by the knowne Laws use forceable restraint: No such meaning of his words: He makes no distinction of states; but expounds the Text in question, speaking of Gods Ordinance in generall, in all Rulers: He knowes it well enough; and therefore addes, They were willing to excuse as much as might be those motions of the Protestants in France and the Low-Countries; but had they lived now, they would have spoken more cautelously. That is, They spake rashly, wronged the truth, and reached their consciences to excuse the commotions and rebellions of those dayes. This is like a Doctor. But he likes the Homilie better then them all, that speakes home, he sayes; but what, he speakes not, nor doe I answer. But he will any the force of this exception, because I professe, with Mr Burrowes, against Resisting of Authority though abused: And with Dr Bilson, admit of resisting the Princes will against the Lawes: The is fast and loose, sayes he. How so? In limited Monarchies, where the Prince hath no Authority beyond the Law: there an act beyond the Law is unauthoritative and metrely private; so that it is no abusing of Authority; but an exceeding of Authority. Authority abused to undue acting of matters within its compasse, Mr Burrowes speakes of, and that must not be resisted. But the Princes will acting against his Law, that is matters without the compasse of Authority is not Gods ordinance, sayes Dr Bilson, and so may be rested in its instruments. I still say, let him prove such acts to proceed from Authority, I will disclaime Resistance of their instruments, either the meanest Constable in the Land, or Souldier in the army. But how cloudes he this truth which is cleare as the day? 1. In that Government under which the Apostle lived, men might not resist, though the Powers commanded contrary to Law, as oft they did: Not under the Arrian Emperours, though religion was then a part of the law, p. 78. Answer, 1. Dr Abbot that learned Bishop of Sarum was of another judgement; Demonstrat. Antichrist, c. 7. In that Government he doth distinguish the Christians carriage according to the distinction of times. At first before Religion was established by Law, cadebantur, non cadebant, but after Constantines time when it was established by Law. Cadebant, non cadebantur. 2. We may grant it in that Government, because it was absolute, and the Laws were to the Prince but morall limitations of exercise: And, as I have often acknowledged, Acts of the Princes will, exceeding such limitation, are potestative, and must not be resisted: but it will not follow that therefore they are so, in governments where the Laws are limitations of the power it selfe, and exceeding acts are not potestative. Sure in those times, as patient as the Christians were, under their persecutours, if their Religion and persons had been assaulted without Authority, they would have made Resistance: And this is all we affirme. 2. He makes two inquiries. 1. Whether the first Parliament in Qu. Elizabeths regine might have resisted her endeavours to change the established Religion? Answer, They had sinned in withstanding the introduction of truth, and the Abolition of Falshood; yet civilly and legally they might have done it: and abrogate a Law without the States she could not. But, blessed he God there was no such opposition; but a joynt consent of all three Legislative Powers. 2. How can the putting down of Episcopall Government, he now justified which stands by Law? Answer: It cannot, unlesse there be a confluence of the consent of all &illegible; nor doe I believe it is intended without the Kings consent, Unlesse their constant doctrine and practise to overthrow the liberties, and Government of this Kingdome into Arbitrarines doe prove them in all their sort subversive, and inconsistent with its safe being: Let therefore the Doctour and the rest of them looke how they continue to maintain such destructive Doctrins: for they will sooner remove themselves out of this Church, then the Subjects out of their ancient and just Liberties.

Sect. 2.At length let us see what he sayes against the absolute condition of the Romane Emperours. His other exception is, they were absolute Monarches, and therefore not to be resisted, p. 79. Ans. He doth me manifest injury: See my Treatise, I no where so argue; nor have I any need; for I equally affirm it of limited, as of absolute power, that they ought not to be resisted; for they are equally Gods Ordinance, wch extends to the powers that are: Neither have I any need of that distinction to satisfie the Apostles Text: I asserted not the absolutenesse of the Imperiall authoritie for any such reason: but against his false affirmation, That that Senate in St Pauls time, might challenge more then our great Councell can now. Here is apparent il dealing. But what can he oppose to what I said about the absolutenes of those Roman Emperours? 1. It cannot be cleared that they were de jure absolute. An. Yes, it can; according to the Doctors own grounds;Seneca. &illegible; &illegible; Marcian. for, 1. There was a full Conquest made by Julius Cæsar in that fatall battell against Pompey not only of him; but in and with him, of the whole Senate, for in eo prima acies senatus suit, says Seneca. And the strugling remainders of the free Senate were again vanquished in that battle of Octavius against Casslus and Brutus. From that time all being prostrate to his Will.Annal. l. 1. s. 1. 2. There was a submission to an Absolute yoake, Romæ ruere in servitium Consules, Patres, Eques, says Tacitus: yea the Senate was so forward to it, that Tiberius was wont to say, as oft as he went out of the Court,Ib. l. 3. s. 11. O homines ad servitutem natos! 3. There was also an establishment of this subjection by an Oath: for the Senate and Armies were brought under the same bond; and all this before St Pauls conversion. That which he brings out of latter Authours, p. 80, of the Lex regia, quâ populus principi omne suum imperium & potestatem contulit: and his conjectures of it’s not being before Vespasians time, is not worth a looking into: It was a formall complement of flattery to give that to him in words, which he had in power and Use so many yeares before. Also that of their forbearing the Diadem and Title of King, being contented only with the of Prince, was but the putting on a &illegible; &illegible; upon a rough government. Vnder that smooth Title the people and Senate were held as much under, as the grand seigneur or Persian now hold their Vassals. But they did perquam aiu magnam potestatis partem cum senatu communicare, p. 80. They did so; I was their indulgence,Annal. l. 1. s. 1. or rather policie to impart it. It is affirmed, not by uncertaine Collections of late Authors; but by Tacitus, who is instar ommum in this businesse; of Augustus the first and best of them all, Posito Triumviri nomine, consulem se sirens, insurgere paulatim, munia Magistratuum, senatus, Legum inse trahere;l. 3. s. 10. and of Tiberius, that imaginem antiquitatis senatui præbebat. They conveyed their will through the old channell of the Senate, that it might relish the better with the people; yet at pleasure did what they listed, by them, and against them. 2. He sayes, The Apostle in his reason against Resistance hath no respect to the absolute or limited condition of these Roman Emperours. Nor doe I say, he hath: the Reason he urgeth is the Ordinance of God, which is true without distinction of the whole latitude of Power. 3. A limited condition doth no more inferre a lawfullnesse of resistance for exorbitances, then an Absolute, p. 82. I say no, that it doth; no condition can inferre a lawfulnesse of Resistance of the Power, though abused; but here is the priviledge of a people under a limited Monarch, his exceeding Acts are not abuses of Power; but simply non potestative; and therefore their Agents may be resisted, without resisting the power; which is not so in an absolute Rule; if there were no priviledge, why did men trouble themselves in constituting Limitations, and Mixtures in a State: In a word, unlesse he can prove Power in all Limited States, to be illimited: and all the Acts of Well in the supreme to flow from Gods Ordinance: He labours in vain from that text, or any else to conclude against Resistance of subversive Instruments in a mixed Government.


Chap. IX. His ninth Section Answered: the Reasons against Resistance satisfied: and those for Resistance vindicated.

Sect. 1.WE are now come to his last Section: In examination of which it will appeare that he hath as little Reason as Scripture against that Resistance which I have asserted in my Treatise. Herein he doth two things. 1. Brings his Reasons against Resistance. 2. Endeavours to answer those which I brought for it. But for more evident proceeding about both, we must distinctly call to mind the Question, of what it is. 1. It is of Resistance in this state; that is, a state which I have proved to be limited and mixed to the very power it selfe. 2. It is only of Resistance of destructive Instruments: Therefore if his Reasons doe not reach to such a Resistance, they are not to the purpose.

Now against Resistance the Doctour brings no fewer then nine Reasons; In his first booke he had only five, here he hath made up in number, what they wanted in weight. I will in few words answer them distinctly, for many need not. 1. His first is from the wisdom of God putting his people under Kings, without power of Resistance; this should be to us instead of a most forceable Reason, p. 84. Answ. Well it may be instead of one; but it is not one. For 1. It was their desire to be under an Absolute Government, as their neighbour Countries were; and they offended God in it, as Lyra observes; therefore he giving them such a King as they desired; did not in his wisdome intend a binding forme for all people: I thinke the Doctour will not affirme he did. 2. If he meane Resistance of their Prince his Authority and person, I grant they were so put under; and so are we, and all that are put under Monarches; but if he mean the Acts of the Princes will which were not Authoritative; I do denie it, and the former alledged instances prove they were not: and that is all I affirme in other Monarchies.

2. The word of God gives no direction for it. The Prophets call not to the Elders for it: The new Testament commends patience in suffering for well-doing. Answ. 1. In Civill matters negative reasonings from Scripture are not proving. 2. The word gives proving and imitable examples for it, as before: and indeed the Scripture doth every way justifie resistance of cut-throats and private destructive Assaulters of Laws and Liberties, who have no Authority derived to them; and I defend no other.

3. The Apostle forbids Resistance of the Powers, not from any compact of the people, but from the Ordinance of God. ’Tis true: for no compact of people could establish an unresistible Power without the Ordinance of God. I acknowledge the Apostles ground for it: and therefore allow no resistance where there is Gods Ordinance to secure them, not for any abuse.

4. To be supreme and next to God implies a security from Resistance, p. 85. I grant all; His Person, his Power is hereby secured: I condemn all rising up against the King: but instruments of subversion, have nothing of the King in them: not his person nor Authoritie is risen up against in them. For his conceits about jus Regis I have said enough above. Neither doe I give to the Houses the power of the Lacedemonian Ephori. They had an Authority over the very person of the King: which the Houses claime not. I give them no more then Calvin doth to the three Estates in their generall meetings. The Doctor well knowes what I will answer him; which he seeks to evade, 1. By affirming that the Resisting of Instruments acting by his Power, which he hath committed to them, is a resisting of him, p. 86. ’Tis true, it is so; but we speake of instruments, which act not by his power, that is, his Authoritie; but by his will in a course exceeding the Limitation of his Authority. Could he prove that a limited Prince could commit Power to doe acts without the bounds of his Power, the Question were answered, els he beggs it, but answers it not. 2. He would desire me to look again upon the two Assertions of the Reverend Divines which I reject: He cannot conceive, how I can rotuine my owne Assertion, and reject theirs. The Doctour hath a great mind to pick some contradiction in me; but still failes in his endeavour. In good earnest, doth he speake really, when he sayes, he cannot conceive, &c. Well, let us looke againe on the two Assertions which I reject in them. 1. Governours who under pretence of Authoritie from Gods Ordinance disturbe the quiet and godly life, are farre from being Gods Ordinance in so doing. 2. This tyrannie not being Gods Ordinance, they which resist it even with armes, resist not the Ordinance of God. Doe I defend any Assertions equivalent to these. Rather I assert in that Treatise, and here also the contrary. 1. Governours whither in absolute or limited States, keeping within the measure of their power, may disturbe the quiet and godly life, and yet be Gods Ordinance in that act, though crossing the end of Gods Ordinance in it. 2. Powers though abused, yet being Gods Ordinance, they which resist even in abusive acts of it, resist the Ordinance of God. Is here no difference? Cannot I retaine this Assertion, that exceeding Acts in limited Monarchie are not Gods Ordinance, and may in instruments be resisted: And yet reject theirs, who maintain resistance of Governours themselves, in all acts of abused power? He makes no difference between Acts exceeding bounds of power: and Acts of abused power: but of this more then enough before. 3. But he will answer more particularly, so he had need. What is it? He that beares the sword, that is, has the supreme Power, gives Commission to under-Ministers for Justice; and to other Officers for the Militia: If therefore the Resistance of those though abusing their Power, be a resistance of the Power; so it is also of these. Answ. I grant all: for it proceeds only of Ministers abusing Power committed to them: not of Excesses of Power. I will retort it. Like as if when the supreme gives Commission of Justice to a Judge; and he exceeding unto Acts without the compasse of his Commission is but a private man in those Acts and may be resisted: so if Commission of Armes be given to a Generall, &c.

5. Subjection is due to a Prince, and the contrary forbidden without distinction of a good and bad Prince. I grant it, and give the reason, because they are Gods Ordinance: but the Question is of instruments of exceeding Acts, in which they are not Gods Ordinance.

6. Good reason that he which hath the supreme Trust, should have the greatest securitie, p. 87. Answ. It is so; and so we grant him: for he hath a full security from all violence for both Person and Authoritis, what ever exorbitance he breakes out unto. The people have not so: Every Subject being under the penalty of the Law for it’s transgressions. But the Doctor forgets his Clients, He is not arguing for securitie of Soveraignes; but Subiects, if they may be so called, which endeavour to subvert lawes and governments. But may we not also say, as it is good reason the supreme should have the greatest securitie; so the people also should have some securitie; and not be exposed like bruit beasts to the savage lusts of every instrument of cruelty: having only this to comfort them, that they sin in so doing? and so they doe, which with cruelty destroy even the bruit creatures.

7. From the end and benefits of Government, for the enioying of which, it is good reason we should beare with the exorbitances. Still he speakes good reason; but nothing to the purpose; for we dispute not of exorbitances of them who have the power; but of them who have no power for what they doe. In exorbitances of lesser nature, their will may secure instruments; but it is against reason that the benefits we have by their Government should cause us to be are with them who would destroy their laws and government, for of such is the Question. I wonder here againe he brings Calvin, when he cannot but know that he is expressely for power of Resistance in the Houses: and no doubt P. Martyr, and the rest follow Calvin in this.

8. Power of Resistance in Subiects would be a remedie worse then the disease, and more subversive of a Suite, then if it wore left without it, p. 92. Why would it be so? It would be a continuall Seminary of jealousies Twixt Prince and people, and confusion through the continuance of the mischiefes of Warre. Concerning this Argument of his, see p. 60. of my Treatise, where it is fully satisfied. 1. Who will believe the power of Resisting destructive instruments, should be more destructive, then to let them alone without Resistance? 2. Suppose by abuse of this power those evils should happen (for it so &illegible; out to the best physicke, where the nocumentous humours are prevailing) yet this is but by accident: such Power per se and of its owne nature tends to the preventing of subversion. On the contrary by woefull experience, this Doctrine of the unresistiblenesse of such men, hath nursed up a brood of audacious projectours, and where it is taught, a state will never be without them. Whereas, if the Truth were knowne it would restaine the spirits of wicked men from &illegible; and State subversion. Neither can any thing be more mischievous, then to teach an impunitie for projectours, and Agents of mischiefe: and he hath not the reason of a man who argues otherwise. 3. Neither can this doctrine, as the Replier tradoces it, extend to the Aeposing of Princes, or the deminishing of their Authority, for it concornes only their Instruments, not their Persons; their Absolute, extra-legall Will; not their Authority. And for iealousies, they will be more bred by that Doctrine which gives the Prince a Power to undoe the &illegible; then by that which terminates both; and gives neither a power to subvert the other; Danger is the nurse of jealousie: that which takes away power of hurting takes away Danger; and so removes iealousies: but indeed such which have a plot of breaking up the hedge of Government, and tringing lawlesse powers into a State, care not for having such a Power in those Houses whom it would cause them to feare, and looke on with continuall jealousies. The Homily of Rebellion is in vaine cited against that which is no rebellion.

9. The last and weakest of all is that of the hearts of Kings being in Gods hands, Prov 21. 1. and that of Gods Covenant with David and his seed, a Chron. 6. 16. & 7. 17. How the Doctor can draw hence a conclusion against Resistance of subversive instruments, I cannot imagine. Sure if these Texts had any proving force in them, they had not been brought so late: Rather their place had been in the former Section, where in the close he saies, He chose onely to insist on those Texts which we sit to be are argument but here he hath broke his word, yet he is excusable, for he had no better.

Sect. 1.At length he comes to my Arguments brought for Resistance. If they be not more concluding then his, would they had never seen the light, nor come to the eye of any judicious man. Let us see what he hath to say to them.

1. That Resistance is lawfull which is no Resistance of the Ordinance of God; but this of subversive instruments is not, being neither of the Person nor Authority of the Prince. He sayes, He hath propased and answered this above under his third and fourth Reasons. And there I doubt not but the invaliditie of his Answer doth plainly appeare.

2. Without this Power of Resistance all limitation of Government is vaine; and all formes resolve into that which is arbitrary. He tels me, My Argument is inconsequent by my owne description of Absolute Monarchie: so that the restraint of a limited Monarch is Legall and Morall, not forceable and Military, p. 93. I answer, I describe limited and Absolute Monarchie not by Force; but the having or not having abounds of Will; but how absurd it is when the distinctive conceit in the definition of a limited Monarch, is a Law terminating his will to take it of a morall terminating, which is common to all, not only Monarches but men? Especially sith I explaine my selfe so fully afterwards, as I doe, there p. 7. in the three degrees of absolutenesse. But I have above enough discovered the fraud and falshood of his confounding of Legall and morall Limitation: and have prooved that to give a Limited Monarch only a morall Limitation, is to resolve all into Absolute and Arbitrary, for the most absolute under heaven hath morall limitation.

3. Such Power is due to a publique State for its preservation which is allowed to a particular person. He answers, this is not universally true. Why not? a State is more worthy, and comprehends a multitude of particular men: doth number detract from their priviledge? He would seeme to have reason for his deniall: A private man hath by the law of nature power of selfe-preservation against the force of another private man; yet is this power yeelded up in regard of Civill Power, and not to be used against persons indued with such power, p. 94. 1. He still speakes Truth; but not to the Question: which is not of persons indued with civill power; but such as we have proved to have no power; grant them endued with power, neither a particular man: or a whole Community must resist them: but having none, it is much more allowable in a publique state, then a particular person. 2. He speakes of a power yeelded up, as if in all governments the people doe simply yeeld up all power of Resistance into a full subjection unto all Acts of the Princes will: Whereas we have prooved, that in limited Governments it is not so: but to the Princes Will measured and regulated by a Law; and therefore they have that power still, in respect of all instruments of acts of Will not so regulated.

But it is observable, that p. 95. the Doctour is beaten off from his owne grounds, and yeelds up in the Close of his booke a full Victory to Truth. Which will appeare if we looke backe to his first booke, and Sect. 1. where he proposeth the Question in his own termes, whither if a King be bent or seduced to subvert Religion, Laws and Liberties, Subjects may take up armes and resist. He undertakes to maintaine the Negative; and here was the beginning of the controversie. Now see in this Replie how he is sunck and stollen off from that which he undertooke to defend; and upon the matter grants us the Cause. Por, 1. By bent or seduced to subvert, he tels us, he means not a purpose of the mind, but doing many Acts arbitrarily tending to subuersion; as if he would yeeld, that (supposing him bent, that is purposing and intending it in his mind and course) he might be resisted. 2. Nay, by [bent to subvert] he does not meane so much as Acts subversive; but onely Acts tending to subversion of themselves; for the frame of government and Lawes cannot be subverted without the consent of the two Houses. So that now the Question is rather, Whither subversion be possible by such instruments; then whether their Resistance be lawfull: Sure it were pitty to disturbe them by Resistance in an impossible worke: Let them run on rather till they see their owne vanity and folly: but suppose they should bring it to passe; then it would be too late to come to this Doctor and tell him, he was deceived, and did deceive. Certainly those great Polititians who have had this &illegible; managing so many yeares, are not of his mind. Yea, suppose it cannot be done without the consent of the Houses; yet the Doctour can tell us in another case, that where there is an unresistible power, Consent cannot long be wanting. What then; will he yeeld us a power of Resistance, if we can proove such a designe possible?

Here also because the Doctor sayes this liberty which I allow a State for its preservation, sends rather to its subversion, p. 94. and every where calumniates me as an inducer of confusion, and Anarchie, and my Assertions as opening a way to Rebellion. It concernes me effectually to vindicate my selfe, and the truth which I maintaine from these aspersions; and make it appeare that the power of Resistance I defend is not a remedy worse then the disease of subversion. Which I can doe no better way, then by a positive setting downe the naked truth which I averre in this and the former Treatise; and shew how it shuts up every way to these evills which he layes uncharitably to my charge. 1. I assert no forceable Resistance in any case but subversive and extreme. 2. Subversive and extreme cases respect either particular men; or the whole state and Government. For particular men even in extreme cases of state or life, I allow no publike Resistance: but appeale if it may be had; or if not, yet no publike Resistance: for whether the wrong be done him by inferiour or superiour Magistrates, either it is. 1. Under forme and course of Law, and power committed them; and then to resist, is to resist the power. 2. Or without all forme and course of Law and power committed to them: and then a man values his state and life too high, to make publike resistance, and bring on the state a generall disturbance for his private good, and sins, though not against Gods ordinance of Power, in this case, yet against the publike peace and weale. For the whole state or government, and the last cases of its subversion, of which the Doctor puts the Question. 1. I condemne all force used against the Person of the supreme, or his Power and Authority in any inferiour Ministers thereof. 2. I averre not publike forceable resistance of Ministers of acts of will which are only actuall invasions, or excesses of limitation; and not such as plainly argue a bent of subversion, and apparent danger thereof, if prevention be not used: so that the Doctor goes from the Question, and comes home to me, when he sayes here that he speakes only of the former sort. 3. I affirme not force in this utmost case to be assumed by private men against destructive instruments of the Princes will: as if any man were warranted on his own imagination of publike danger to raise forces for prevention. But the Courts of Justice, and especially the supreme Court, to whom the conservation of Government and Law is committed, and a Power not only to resist, but also censure and punish its violaters, much more its subverters without regard of number or warrant, (The Law supposing no warrant can be in such case) This is the power of Resistance which I have asserted: and it this be inducing of civill warre, or a way to subversion and Rebellion: It is a warre raised by defenders of Law, against subverters of Law: A Rebellion raised by Magistrates having Authority, against instruments of arbitrarinesse having no authority: A resistance tending to subversion, but of none but subverters. ’Tis good reason then, it seemes, if destroyers grow to the number and strength of an Army, for Magistrates to let them alone, and not raise armes to suppresse them, lest they open a way to confusion and bring on the miseries of a civill Warre. This is the Doctors preservative Doctrine, and my contrary is destructive. 4. I argued from the end of the institution of the Houses, and their interest in making Laws, and preserving the frame. He sayes this is grounded on my false supposall of their being joyned with the King in the very soveraigne power, p. 96. Answer, I have justified that supposall; and manifested his strange boldnesse in denying it against the Kings, and so many Parliaments direct affirmations; and desire the reader to take notice, that this is Calvins argument for Resistance, in the place above recited, how ever the Doctor doth make so light of it.

5. From the power of inferiour Courts to punish violaters of Law, though pretending a warrant of the Kings will for it. He sayes this Argument is inconsequent to prove power of raysing Armies to oppose the Forces of their Soveraigne. He hastens to a conclusion, and weighs not much what he answers. I say it concludes inevitably: for if the Kings warrant to violate Law, will not priviledge one from force of justice, then not a hundred, not an Army of violaters. Their multitude makes the danger greater, and the Kingdome more unhappy; not Malefactors more priviledged. The forces of the Soveraigne in truth, are the Forces raised to defend his Government; not those which are raised to subvert it. They are his, which have his Authoritative will; not those which have only his arbitrary. If ever Reasons did demonstrate a truth, I am confident these five have made good, The power of the estates in Parliament to resist subversive instruments, be they more or fewer.

Sect. 3.Thus have I traced this Author through his Reply; and whether I have not sufficiently vindicated my Treatise from it, I referre my selfe to the conscience of every one who hath the understanding of a judicious man; and the impartiality of a just man. In my cap. 8. is a moderate debate of the present contention; and divers Petitions tending to pacification if it had been possible: but he toucheth not on that chapt. His discourse shewes him to have nothing to doe with Moderation; nor doth desire Peace, but on the termes of a full dedition into the hands of subversive instruments. I have done with him: He resolved, I Answered. He hath replyed. I have returned on it. I am even with him; and in truth above him, I am sure. Now I desire to spin out this contention no longer. Yet if he, or any else please to rejoyne, I wish he would save himselfe, and me a labour: to let alone the booke; and deale only with the 4th, and 5th Chapters concerning the Doctors supposals; if he can make good them; and invalidate mine, as much as in me lieth, I will yeild him the cause: but I judge it impossible, if I know what is impossible. The God of spirits allay the spirits of men from this extreme opposition: And give such a issue to these wofull warrs, that the scepter of Christ, the Gospell of Peace may be fully submitted to and maintained by a King enjoying inviolate his due soveraignty; and a People their due and lawfull liberties, Amen.

Phil. 4. 5.

Let your moderation be known unto all men: The Lord is at hand.

FINIS.


 


8.20. Anon., The Arch-Cheate, or the Cheate of Cheats (4 October, 1644)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., The Arch-Cheate, or the Cheate of Cheats: OR A notable discovery of some parts of the mystery of iniquitie, plainely shewing that this is the Prelates Warre, managed under the Kings Name, only to advance the Hierarchie above the temporality, yet leave them some externalls to deceive all sides, and all sorts, a choice peece of gullery trimely set out.
Cause we are more for the Senses then Sense.
Thus our conceptions we doe commence.

P. The Puppets.
F. A fellow pointing.
C. All sorts of common people.
H. The countrey Husband-man or Farmer.
B. The Prelate ordering of all.
K. The King.
N. Nobles.
S. The Shark or Cavaleer inforcing the Damsell.

The voting Puppets each eye descries,
But its (1)Sophia hath the seing eyes
(2) Plebeians move in lowest Sphere,
But its wisdome mouts the highest career.
The (3) Puppets seemingly do braule,
But its Mercuriall (4) Hocus governs all.
Though (5) Pallas should, whose dues (6) the golden ball.
But the goddesse (7) Astrea shall know all.

  1. The Wise see further, then with eyes.
  2. Common understandings reach not things, things out reach them.
  3. To the Sects and the rude people all is attributed.
  4. But its the crafty Prelates, and their Athisticall Faction under severall species, pretenc [Illegible letters] all together by the cares
  5. Wisdome not craft should governe.
  6. All excellencies belonging to wisdom, and the wise.
  7. In a threatning way, and in time of remedy, Iustice shall be told of all her prankes.

London printed for M. W. at Grays-Inne Gate, October 4. 1644.

Estimated date of publication

4 October, 1644.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 343; Thomason E. 257. (5.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

Nor to faile when all saile were to be singular, which is the greatest failing.Courteous Reader, here is but a little poetrie, and yet its lame of its feets, let thy ingenuitie relieve it, for its thy only strength to beare with its wealnesse, and its therefore weake to trie thy strength, and it hath therefore sailed that it might not saile.

S. H.

The Arch Cheate, OR The Cheate of Cheates: OR A notable Discoverie of some parts of the Mystery of Iniquity, plainely shewing, that this is the Prelates War, mannaged under the Kings name, only to advance the Hierarchy, above the Temporality, Yet leave them, some externalls, to deceive all sides and all sorts, a choise peece of Gullery trimely set out.

Writ at the beginning of these troubles, but occasionally confind. till now.

THere is a Crew which* crowes and crowner themselves with Rose-Buddes of bewtie, sweetnesse and delight (of with the Prelates and popishly affected, irreligious religious men are chiefe) who ayming at greatnesse and all kinde of licentiousnesse, &c. and withall to advance thereto nimbly also without royle yea to Soveranize and King themselves and governe kingdomes, doe breake through all lawes, Devine, Humane, Morall, Rationall, &c. to attaine thereto.

2. This to bring about, they sinde lies in the interressing themselves into the favours and good opinions of Princes, under the pretence of amplifying the greatnesse and Prerogatives, &c. next by gaining all the powers into their hand as for the emptic titular titles, and some externalls, they leave them to the temporall* Laike Kings and Peeres to collour the businesse, that the Cheat may not be seene, &c.1

3. Their owne names will not carry it, they wanting Law, Right, Title and opinion, &c.2

4. Besides they must not appeare in the action, but lie close snugge, and close hid as doth in shewes the lurking spirit that guideth the oculer motions, which are onely seene to act all, and all to them is attributed, but cunning Hocus playes his prankes under boord.

5. With Princes then they tamper, who have law, right and title on their side, and opinion too, that foolish goddesse, and goddesse of fooles, their names they advance, magnifie, yea deifie, &c. but prostrate prerogative, &c.

6. It takes Herod-like with some too much with all to their falls.

7.

More Princes fall in Court by Flatterrers charmes.

Then in the field by the Aversaries armes, &c.

8. On they goe and pinacle Princes with Prerogatives about God, but sure they will be to mount with them, as did the Devill with our Saviour: and then on, with condition of his dismounting, prostration and3 worshipping beastly monsters, with seaven Heads and tenne Hornes, they will doe wonders, if not done before they come,----why, they will give him all the4 Kingdomes of the Earth, and subdue the5 Nations to him, with an Iron Rod, or rather than faile----6 with a staile.

9. Great is the Temple of the goddesse Diana, but were it not for her silver Puppetts the godlesse gods and her Temple might goe fiddle----so might Prerogatives, &c.

10. These gracelesse youngsters,7 gracious yet with Princes, and are seemingly very officious to accommodate them with Honour, Greatnesse, Majestie, &c.

11. A Golden baite, but the forked hooke appeares not.

12. By this they attaine to be their Counsellors and next the betrust of places of command and power which was the white they aymed at, as the onely way to King themselves, and depose Princes, oppose others.

13. These they bestow into hands of their owne faction, such as can slatter and abuse Princes out of their prerogatives as well as themselves----Birds of a Feather.

14. Now who but these are the only men with8 Kings I and Queens to, Oh they are wilie Mercuries and have curious blandishments to insinuate into and insatuate all sorts, and fatten themselves, &c.

15. Well Princes conceive the power in their owne hands, but P.O. for that, its the9 Prelates prize, of which he must not know any thing till their ends bee compassed.

16. As for him he may goe10 sleep, sport, hunt, or tennis it, they will order matters well enough for his greatnesse, and renowne if ill enough bee well enough, &c.

17. The Popish government under the cheating name of Religion they mainly ayme at, but mum not a word of either not intentions but pranct up pretentions like gaudy Dianah must gadde abroad to bewitch the foolish Sechemites but Simcon and &illegible; brothers of iniquity drive on their designes like furious Jehu to circumvent the credulous Sechemites, with universall Ruine.

The wicked &illegible; and Clergy of all sorts.18.The Kings name still carries out all things, but he is kept ignorant of whatsoever is offensive to his nature or disposition, or else they doe palliate it with pretexes qualifications, &c.

by threatnings so by keeping them at distance, as with &illegible;19. They raile of all their adversaries, from accesse or prepare antidotes against their poyson as against beliefe infidelity and villefie with names to contemptablenesse.

20. But with the people, they magnifie an implicit faith believe as the Church believes the trumpe of Cheats, &c.

21. Mountaine promises are made, of Iustice libertie lawes, and Religion, but not a dust or graine made good, except jering as Children and Fooles for their easie &illegible;

Its glory to betray any way disglory to be betrayed.

22. It Robbing, murchering, ravashing, yea all kind of injustice be justice &illegible; none more just more faithfull in performance, twise twelve to the dusson.

23. Quarrells are pict, pretences found, on purpose to rout out all oposers either Religious or Morralists.

24.

It is easie to finde a staffe to beat a Dogge, } with the
Its as easie to finde a Dogge for a staffe. } quarrelsome.

25. Other pretences are found to raise Armes, any thing is just with the powerfull any thing seemes soe with the simple.

Nobles. Gentry, Commons all sorts comply.26. Some on hopes, promises, preferments rewards, offices, and others, a licentious libertine course of life others errors of judgment, Scruples of conscience, opinion pretences of one kind or other.

Most a fooles paradice——here.

or a ports Elizium——hereafter.

28. What should I say it asketh an eternity to rectifie all these giddie braines.

29. If they be not Traitors, Rebells, Murtherers. Theeves, and punshable as such here, and damnable hereafter who are on the offensive side, and fight against Religion the liberty of the people, and priveledges of Parliament all established by law. The name of a King is so dazeling that it prostrates all behoulders——except——. Bell whom Danill must prostrate.

The following marginalia text is unreadable and Liberty Fund has made no effort to partially transcribe it.30. Beautie in Heaven and Earth this grace doth win.

It supplyes &illegible; and it lestens sinne &c.

31. Souldiers are raised, why, Iohn for the King, so all, and who not, they see none other they spie not &illegible; under the Board, nor that Ioabs hand is in all this they are light Angells, but not Angells of light.

32. If monyes be wanting, then Nimrod like that mighty hunter plundring, robbing whole Countries, Counties to monut their Babell battlements, paralall with those of Heaven, is lawfull and under the name of warring to perpetrat any villany is excellent villany—if any villany be excellent.

33. That which even now was a hanging matter to doe, is now a hanging matter not to doe.

Thus a moment can invert, pervert circularly.

34. Out goes Simmons, &illegible; Threats &c. to amate awe &c.For themselves in the Kings name. Trained, Bands comes in as if to the Goulden Septer—poore folkes, Hocus is to hard for you, its to the Crosiers staffe which like Muses rod hath champtup the Septer, and now begines with its cammocke note to catch hold of them as did the bush of Ablahams Ram, they are plundered, they fleed of their fleeces as of Horse,Iudas is no Iudas to this Judas. Armes money, and sent away like a pilde sheepe, or as a Dogge with his taile clapt betwixt his leggs.

35. Horse, Armes, money, throng in as if to homage it to the bunished throne which so dazeleth and a stomnisheth all behoulders that they spie not lurking Hocus the Iudas who for thirty pence will sell his Master and all his Desciples——. &illegible; like a Satier or as Mosse his Mare simpered when she eat thistles to seeof the wise. these so insaturated fooles purchase themselves halters, manacles, fetters as so deare a &illegible; and like Salom us fooles, goe to the Stocks for correction.He cannot helpe it He is their Prisoner Jeering Hocus.

36. If the Throne conquer, yet Hocus is victor, who sliely conveyes away the throne and sets his tressells in the place nimbly over layning them wlith a watther covering imbrodered with goulden Floure deluces,Glorious Titles &c. and as nimbly clapsa Miter thereon instaed of a Crown all so dexterously handled as unespied of any but the wife Sophia whose intantions discovers the cloven head of the Miter just like that of the Divels foote out she cries of the cheat. Oh you fooles how long will you continue in your follie but all in vaine as I doe lieare, for fooles though brayed in Morters will not forsake their folly, nor will dease Adderi heare charme you never so wisely.

37. Now they soveragnize it yet the Kings name colours all still, I and now he beginnes to colour it also with anger and shame to so the &illegible; but* noe force patience, perforce, he is as fast as Mars and Venus in Vulcans weary net, the more hee spraules and kirkes, the more he is intangled* at this slie* Mercury laughs a maine but unespied of any, but only the wife* Sophia who still carries out, but is not heard, Oh you fooles &c.

38. Yet externalls are allowed as gay as the Chamblet &illegible; Hocus pulls out of his mouth to delude the fillie Spectators.

39. So have I seene at Childrens festivalls the gaudie King and Queene followed by an awfull blacke Coat neither crowned nor Robed, yet well &illegible; who told at pleasure; though a pawne give Checkemate to both Rex et Reginojubeati.

41. Great matters are promised, hoped for as at* but who shall now force to performance, they are Atheists, yea worse, not Moralists, not any Bonds, Oathes, &illegible; will hold any more then Samsons, &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;For you shall be kept under like beasts by the sword and with implicit factions, Law, but will and that of barbarous villanes. &c. you challenge them of this and that, &c. except &illegible; exclaime what care they, they know you not how now, away, avant your workers of Iniquity.

42. Helpe of King availes not how can I saith the seeing that the Lord Prelat pleaseth not to looke upon either of us.

43. Is not this fine that you have &illegible; your &illegible; and enslaved yourselves and your posterities, to the forked &illegible; instead of the &illegible; Crowne, and must now aske and wait for what was once your owne, but it may be never shall bee.

The Government of Spain and France is in the &illegible; then &illegible; is, not the Kings.44. All are their Prisoners and Captives from the throne to the cottage, not Kings not Nobles, not Gentry, not any are free, but lie at their mercy for &illegible; or srowns.

45. And now are the commons of England putting on Canvis Breeches and woodden shooes, and the Peeres are but so, ad placitum the Gentry, and are but Gentiles an saliants to the Common-weale of Israell there.

46. Former freedome and liberty----for like to foolish and prophane Esan, all sort and all degrees have sold their birth rightes for a Messe of Pottage (as red as the sload of Martyrs.

&illegible; the Popish Prelates.47. Certaine 21 things called religious men, murther, steale, rape, oppresse, what not, by their temporall agents, who act all, like the apparent Pupitts, but while Mercurie still playes his prankes under-board, or slinkes behinde the Curtaine, like a snarling Curre.

&illegible; Nations put up this.48. Then lastly they jeere to see how finely with the Kings names have Seale, shewes, promises, personall presence, protests, threats, and flowrishes, messengers, &c. they have befooled all sorts, out of their Religion, Lawes Liberties, and estates each one holding what they have of them simply:I am of opinion whilst the K, is in such hacksters handling, nothing should bee &illegible; as &illegible; but refeld with scorne, as from these, &c Let not our Nobles and Gentry, nor the Scot also. Flatter they doe, using the Kings name O this our worthy Subject, &c. nothing in fee-simple, and &illegible; simpletons all are.

49. Now Esan his rough hands gripe like a Griffen &c,

50. In the name of forraigne Princes ayd comes in, as if to Princes, their &illegible; names, colours, all but it is oft from faction to faction from Cheater to Cheater, and the poore Princes are prund of all, O you Princes how long will you &illegible; your selves to be gulled of your Prerogatives, under pretence of maintaining Prerogative is it not time to give over these wilely beguiles?

51. Trust not I say, your lives, nor your Posterities in the hands of Traytors, Rebells, to whom if you comply not, they will send you packing----and not comply, but desie, &c.

52. Suffer their King, so themselves to be overtopt by the Prelacie once more, and the government translated to the Hierarchy, shall their wiles, suggestions, and pretences so far delude as not to see, is its not pretences, but by-intentions wch they steere to, rowse up your spirit and quicken your understandings and vindicate your King and your selves, and your Country from their inslavements, and redeeme your selves from their jeers, serious insultations, down with them, and for other matters settle with Wisedome in its opportunity.To raise, prefer, conferre honour as they list, then jeere &illegible; the Gulles that the King doth all, and its themselves by him to purchase the Kingdome. &illegible; be til convincement, which doth &illegible; is just.

53. Call to minde the misery as, the Irish, so this Nation have indured by their meanes.

54. Be as faithfull to your country, as the Scotts to theirs.

55. As the ten Tribes to one poore wronged Levit.

56. Are we not your Brethren, flesh of your flesh, bone of your bones.

57. And for Religious severity which oweth all sorts. If you dare trust a &illegible; such dispensatious shall be found as shall content all sides without gaine saying, though nothing remove mean then your meane.

58. This cruell crow make riddance of least it rid us all which God and you forbid.

59. I Protest the King and you are abused by their suggestions, their &illegible; so their practises are destructive to the prerogatives, yea safety of Princes, States, Law, then are they thus suffered? who should suffer.

60. What hurt doe the Protestants, or sects in Holland, France, &c. are they not faithfull every where some follies, humors opinions they Masse and hould that are troublesome but treacherous they are not they stab not, nor poyson, betray, &illegible; burne fire not downe houses, Cities, whole Kingdomes, they delight not in blood and &illegible; as the Papists doe. Oh murther them not by neglect, for neglect is murther, Robery, Rape &c.

61. I end as did the Levite to the ten Tribes, see, consider, Iudge and give sentence.

62.

And doe as in the twentieth of Judges, the Tribes did all at their owne charge for our levite assembled, &c. { Read and faile not.

63. They delaid not, but met as one man, and accommodated to right, and revenge the injury done to the said one poore Levit, but oh our Levity, &c.

64. Forget not then Oh all you whom it may concerne, as it doth all, who in any kinde can doe good least not only a mother in Israell, but the mother of Israell, yea Israell herselfe be destroyed, which God and you forbid, and you will forbid if men you be, that is have the bowells of men, of mercy, and resolution of manhood in you.

Oh why doth not the Kingdome like an inundation, or deluge overwhelme these rascall crew of Egyptian Gipses. { Least they Cheat the King and State of the Kingdome, and we be a jeare to all Nations. Vale.
A short Summary of the premisses for plain Capacities.

ALL the Atheists, inhumaness, Traytors, Rebells, Rogues, Theeves, Cheates, Cutpurses, Murderers, so all idle and lawlesse persons of the Kingdom are met together, and have got the King amongst them to colour, and credit their rogery, his person, and name they seeme to magnifie to the people, the King, the King, the Lords anoynted, but Jeere, and scorne both him, and all Lords, just as did the Demetrians Diana, who magnified her only to make themselves, and as did the Princes abuse, and overthrow Darius and made pretence of godding him, unmade him, and made colour of Prerogating him, precipitated him, &c. These now with the Kings, Person, Name, Seale, Warrants, Proclamations, Letters, Threats, Messengers, &c. &illegible; all sides, especially the simple, whose opinions, Idolatrize the name and persons of Kings, and at this advantage the villanous adversary presumes, glories, insults and jeeres. For what ever they have a mind to doe, they doe it, and the King must, or they will inforce his person, or name, or both to beare it out; Thus Towns, Cities, Forts, &c. are summond, so Horse, Armes, mony are taken up, as if for the Kings use, when it may be he knowes not of it, or knowing, cannot helpe it, injoy all they doe, not he, any thing, but in name, so with commands, Proclamations are abroad & its not the King, but this faction is accommodated, scornfully, &illegible; they urge, what keep Forts, Towns, and what from your King, Soveraigne, &illegible; Anoynted? cause they should be delivered to him, what not obey your King &illegible; they would be obeyd, what fight against your King! the Lords Anoynted, &illegible; they would command, rule, doe all things as, they list, and have no resistance thus all are fooles, or knaves, or both, and take part with Traitors (as they say &illegible; ayde the King) but its to keept him their prisoner. Forraigne States are thus &illegible; or would gull, for in thinking to ayde the King, they ayde Traytors against him, &illegible; politickly, intend the King, and so support their owne faction against him, and the State, thus which simple to us, or Knaves, the loyall that fight for to rescue him, seene against, &c. so traiterous, and rebellious, and those true Traytors (cause locally on his side) seem to fight for him, and they doe so indeed, for its to hold him their prisoner, to colour, and credit their Rogery as afore, so they are seemingly &illegible; all, who are most absolute desolute loyalists.

Now seeing its discovered, let fooles Knaves, and Malignants see to it, their pretend not, no longer to abuse King and State, and fight, and speake against him, is seeming to speake, and fight for him, as did DEMETRIVS Humanis, and the Princes of Darius all birds of the same Fether, for neither their bauleing, nor sophisticall pretended prate can quit them of being Traitors and Rebells to King and State at large, or content, so also there are Hypocrites murtherers, &illegible; and Cheaters, &c. and who are so, are base, base then as they are, they must passe for, and fooles let them passe for who are so cheated.

FINIS.

Endnotes

 [* ] In their &illegible; and incentions & are Athists also.

 [1. ] This they render them in contempt.

 [2. ] As in Puppet playes or other motions under needs guides all. The Kings Name, Hand, Person, &c. deceaves and conquers the Kingdome. I GNOTO.

 [3. ] Their prophane Hierarthie.

 [4. ] The riches powers and honours of Kingdomes:

 [5. ] England. Scotland. Ireland.

 [6. ] Any way.

 [7. ] Ignorant of their Rogery.

 [8. ] Ignorant, as afore of their Rogery.

 [9. ] Or the Priests bit. 1 Sam. 2. 13, 14.

 [10. ] Our geeress of Princes so all sorts.

 [* ] &illegible; are promised in the Kings name to betroy thus that Fort Castle, &c. and its all by these Traitors for themselves, they rob to pay the bribe or paies it, and 10. times more out of the places delivered up to them &illegible; Virtue that is power is &illegible; from me.

 


8.21. Katherine Chidley, A New Years Gift (2 January, 1645)[missing text]

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Katherine Chidley, A NEW-YEARES-GIFT, OR A BRIEF EXHORTATION To Mr. Thomas Edwards; That he may breake off his old sins, in the old yeare, and begin the New yeare, with new fruits of Love, first to GOD, and then to his BRETHREN.
PSAL. 7.14, 15, 16.
Behold, hee travelleth with iniquity, and hath conceived mischiefe, and brought forth falshood.
He made a pit, and digged it, and is fallen into the ditch which he made.
His mischeife shall returne upon his owne head, and his violent dealing shall come downe upon his owne pate.

PSAL. 50.19, 20, 21.
Thou givest thy mouth to evill, and thy tongue frameth deceit.
Thou sittest and speakest against thy Brother; Thou slanderest thine owne Mothers Sonne.
These things hast thou done, and I kept silence: thou thoughtest that I was altogether such a one as thy selfe: but I will reproove thee, and set them in order before thine eyes.

By KATHRINE CHIDLEY.
Printed in the Yeare, 1645.

Estimated date of publication

2 January, 1645.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 355; Thomason E. 23. (13.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

(insert text of pamphlet 1645–01–02_Chidley_NewYearsGift.pdf here)


8.22. Thomas Johnson, A Discourse on Freedome of Trade (11 April, 1645)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Thomas Johnson, A DISCOURSE Consisting of MOTIVES FOR The Enlargement and Freedome OF TRADE. Especially That of CLOTH, and other Woollen MANUFACTURES, Engrossed at present Contrary to the Law of Nature, the Law of Nations, and the Lawes of this Kingdome. By a Company of private men who stile themselves Merchant-Adventurers. The First Part.

Imprimatur, NA. BRENT. April. 11. 1645

LONDON, Printed by Richard Bishop for Stephen Bowtell, and are to be sold at his shop at the signe of the Bible in Popes-Head Alley. 1645.

Estimated date of publication

11 April, 1645. (Listed in TT as 23 April).

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 373; Thomason E. 260. (21.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

To the Right Honourable the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled.

Right Honourable,

THE scope and substance of this following Discourse, is to demonstrate by clear and unanswerable Arguments, the Illegality of the Incorporation of those who soly ascribe unto themselves the names of Merchants Adventurers, though they Trade but unto two Townes only, and those hard by: and to shew further how their Patent trencheth upon the native Rights of the freeborn subject: which Patent hath been often complaind of and clamord against from time to time, as an universall greevance to Town and Countrey, tending to the diminution of Trade, and of all sorts of Manufactures at home, and to the dis-repute of the Policy of this Nation abroad, the sayd Patent being accounted no lesse amongst all people, then a Monopoly, a word odious all the world over. This Incorporation hath bin like an Ulcer upon the Body politique of this Kingdome a long time, which hath beene often rub’d and lanc’d, yet it clos’d againe and gatherd more corruption then formerly, and now requires a greater cure then ever.

Therfore in all humblenesse it is prayed, that this Honourable Court and highest Councell of the Kingdom, who have already done so many glorious things for the publike Liberty, Rights and Immunities of the free borne Subject, would be pleased to peruse the ensuing Discourse, and poise the weight of the Reasons, Arguments, and proofes therein produced, which are derived from true fountaines, and so to doe therein what in their high wisedome and justice they shall think expedient for the redresse of such a Nationall grievance.

A DISCOURSE Consisting of Motives FOR The Enlargement and Freedome of Trade, Especially That of Cloth and other Woollen Manufactures,

Engrossed at present

Contrary to { the Law of Nature,
{ the Law of Nations,
{ and the Lawes of this Kingdome,

By a Company of private men who stile themselves

Merchant-Adventurers.

THe Terrestriall Globe is cut out into Islands and Continents, both which are created to be a Mansion for men; and although they be severd by the work of Nature, yet they may be said to be joynd together by Commerce, which is that great link of humane Society, that golden chaine which unites all Nations; And though the Earth and Sea be of themselves, as differing Elements as any of the rest, yet the Divine Providence by a speciall foresight hath so indented as it were, and embosomd them one in the other, that they make but one perfect Globe, to render them thereby more apt for the mutuall Commerce and Negotiation of Mankinde.

Of all parts of the Earth, Islands (which by the violence of the Sea are torne off from the rest of the world) stand most in need of Commerce, as well for the encrease of shipping, whereon their security and strength doth principally depend, as for divers other advantages conducing to wealth, to the expence of the superfluities of their owne native Commodities, and the importation of forreigne, to intelligence, and prevention of dangers, and lastly to the improvement of civility and knowledge.

And this our Island (for ought any one knoweth) might have remaind to this day in her first simplicity and rudenesse, had she not refined and civilized her selfe by Commerce with those of the next Continent, and they of the next Continent, had they not crossed the Alps to Italy; and the Italians themselves, had they not had practise with the Levantines, and other Eagle-eyed Nations who dwell nearer the Sun rising.

Amongst the Islands of the old world, Great Britain hath beene cried up for the biggest, and best-replenished with those Commodities that are most materiall and usefull for the life of man, whereof she hath not only a competency for her selfe, but enough to spare her neighbours, which by way of surplusage she useth to disperse to most Countreys, whereby she beates a generall Trade, and makes rich returnes with her owne home-growne goods: which Trade may bee termed the prime sinew, and chiefest support both of her strength and riches.

Now there is nothing so advantagious and commendable in a Trade, as Community and Freedome; for in this particular (as in most things else) the topique Axiome holdeth, Bonum quò communius, eò meliùs; the more common and diffusive a good thing is, the better it is.

The most substantiall and staple Commodity that our Countrey affords for the maintenance of Trade is Cloth, with divers Manufactures besides arising from Wooll, which makes other Nations call Wooll, Englands Golden Fleece: and (questionlesse) the principall reason why in time of Parliament our Iudges (who are the Oracles of the Law) do sit in the House of Peeres upon Wooll-Sacks, was to put them in minde of preserving and advancing the Trade and Manufactury of Wooll: Therefore to barre any freeborn subject from the exercise of his Invention and Industry, to convert this universall native Commodity to his best advantage at home, or abroad, is to deprive him of part of his birth-right, and of that which God and Nature ordaynd for his subsistence; and not only so, but it is to set a mark of strangenesse, or rather, of a kinde of slavery upon him in his own Countrey.

Hence it may well be inferrd, that for one Company, or Incorporation to arrogate to it selfe, and to engrosse the mannaging, expence, and vending of this necessary inmated Commodity, is an injury to publike right, and no lesse then a meere Monopoly: And it is held an undoubted principle of State, that there is nothing more pernicious and destructive to any Kingdome or Common-wealth, then Monopolies, which like Incubusses doe suck the very vitall spirits, and drive into one veine that masse of blood which should cherish the whole body: Nor doth this word Monopoly (according to its true Etimology) referre only to one individuall person, but also to any one Town, where many men are incorporated or aggregated into one body, who have hooked to themselves the sole exercise and emolument of such and such a trade, whereby they only enrich themselves, and admit no others to enter into their Society without some exaction.

The fellowship and Charter of them that terme themselves Merchant-Adventurers (under favour) is a Monopoly of this kinde, and is repugnant both

  • 1.  To the Law of Nature,
  • 2.  To the Law of Nations,
  • 3.  To the positive Law of the Land.

First, it is repugnant to the Law of Nature, in regard that Wooll, and the draping and merchandizing thereof, being the Cape Commodity wherewith Nature, the handmaid of God Almighty, hath furnished this Island, and wherein she hath given every freeborn Inhabitant equall interest, as matter for his industry to work upon; Surely she never intended that a thin handfull of men, a small contemptible number in comparison of the whole (being but a few trading members, though their Company consists of a greater number) should appropriate to themselves the disposing and venting of the two thirds of this generall grand Commodity, as by diligent computation the Merchant-Adventurers are observed to doe.

Secondly, it is against the Law of Nations, in regard that no Monarchy or Kingdom, whether elective or successive, nor any other Commonwealth or State throughout Europe hath the like example. What a hubbub would there bee in France, if the vent of Wines were passed over to some peculiar men to furnish England withall? or in Spaine, or Naples, were the fruits and oyles of the one, and the silks of the other (being their prime Commodities) engrossed by a few hands? But admit there were some extraordinary restraints in trading to remote Countreys, and that there were joynt stocks, it maketh nothing to justifie the Company of Merchant-Adventurers. We know our East-India Company* here, and in Holland, have limitations, and have a Bank of their owne, because the Purses of private men cannot extend to set forth Ships for making of such long, adventurous, costly, voyages. But the Trade which is beaten by our Merchant-Adventurers to Hamburgh and Rotterdam, is of another nature, for it is hard by home, and as it were at our doores, and may be performed by Ships of any seize, the transfretation being short; so that though they seeme to arrogate soly to themselves the names of Merchant-Adventurers, there are none that deserve it lesse, their hazard being so small, and their voyage so short.

Thirdly, this Incorporation is repugnant to the, positive Lawes of this Land, as manifestly appears by Magna Charta, Petition of Right, Statutes of Monopolies, and severall others; but for brevity sake, let it suffice to insert here that famous Statute which was enacted by one of our wisest Kings, Henry the seventh, which continueth yet in full force unrepealed, and runnes thus.

&illegible; H. 7. 1. 6.To the discreet Commons in this present Parliament assembled, sheweth unto your discreet wisdomes the Merchant-Adventurers inhabiting and divelling in divers parts of this Realm of England out of the City of London, that where they have their passage, resort, course and recourse with their goods, wares, and merchandize, in divers coasts and parts beyond the Sea, aswell into Spain, Portugall, Britain, Ireland, Normandy, France, Civill, Venice, Dansk, Eastland, Freezland, and other divers and many places, regions, and countreys, being in league and amity with the King our Soveraign Lord, there to buy and sell, and &illegible; their Exchanges, with their said goods, wares, and merchandizes, according to the Law and Custome used in every of the said Rigions and places; and there every person freely to use himselfe to his most advantage, without exaction, fine, imposition, or contribution, to bee had or taken of them, or of any of them, to, for, or by any English person, or persons. And in semblable wise they before this time have had, used, and of right owen to have, and use their free passage, resort, and recourse into the coasts of Flanders, Holland, Zealand, Brabant, and other places thereto nigh adjoyning under the obeysance of the Arch-Duke of Burgoyn: In which places the universall Marts be commonly kept and holden foure times in the year, to the which Marts all English men, and divers other Nations in time past have used to resort, there to sell and utter the commodities of their Countreys, and freely to buy again such things as seemed them most necessary and expedient for their pofit, and weale of their Countreys, and parts that they be come fro, till now of late, that by the Fellowship of the Mercers and other Merchants and Adventurers dwelling and being free within the City of London, by confederacy made among themselves, of their uncharitable and inordinate covetousnesse, for their singular profit and lucre, contrary to every English mans Liberty, and to the Liberty of the said Mart there, which is, that every person of what Nation that he be of, should have their free liberty there to buy and sell, and make the commutations with the Wares, Goods, and Merchandizes at their pleasure, have contrary to all Law, Reason, Charity, Right, and Conscience, amongst themselves, to the prejudice of all English men, made an Ordinance and Constitution, that is to say, That no English man resorting to the said Mart, shall neither buy nor sell any goods, wares, or merchandizes there, except he first compound and make fine with the said Fellowship, Merchants of London, and their said Confederates, at their pleasure, upon paine of forfeiture to the said Fellowship, Merchants of London, and to their Confederates, of such merchandizes, goods, or wares, so by him bought, or sold there: which Fine, Imposition, and Exaction, at the beginning when it was first taken, was demanded by colour of Fraternity of Thomas Becket Bishop of Canterbury, at which time the said Fine was but the value of an old Noble sterling, and so by colour of such feigned holinesse, it hath beene suffered to be taken for a few yeares passed, and afterwards it was encreased to an hundred shillings Flemish, and now it is so, that the said Fellowship and Merchants of London take of every English man, or yong Merchant, being there at his first comming, forty pound sterling for a fine, to suffer him to buy and sell his owne proper Goods, Wares, and Merchandizes that he hath there: By occasion whereof, all Merchants, not being of the said Fellowship and Confederacy, withdraw themselves from the said Marts, whereby the woollen Cloth of the Realm, which is one of the greatest Commodities of the same, by making whereof the Kings true Subjects be put in occupation, and the poore people have most their living, and also other divers Commodities of divers and severall parts of this same Realm is not sold ne uttered as it was in times past, but for lack of utterance of the same in divers parts, where such Clothes be made, they be conveyed to London, where they be sold farre under the price that they be worth, and that they cost to the makers of the same, and at sometime they be lent to long dayes, and the money thereof at divers times never paid; And over that, the Commodities and Merchandizes of those parts, which the said Fellowship, Merchants of London, and others their Confederates bring into this Land, is so sold to your said Complainants and other the Kings true Subjects, at so deare and high exceeding price, that the buyer of the same cannot live thereupon, by reason whereof, all the Cities, Towns, and Burroughs of this Realme in effect be fallen into great poverty, ruine, and decay, and as now in manner they without hope of comfort, or reliefe, and the Kings Customes and Subsidies, and the Navy of the Land greatly decreased and minished, and daily they be like more to decay, if due reformation be not had in this behalfe. Be it therefore enacted by the King our Soveraigne Lord, by the advise and assent of the Lords spirituall and temporall, and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by authority of the same, that every English man, being the Kings true Leigeman, from henceforth have free passage, resort, course and recourse into the said coasts of Flanders, Holland, Zealand, Brabant, and other places there to nigh adjoyning, under the obeysance of the said Archduke, to the Marts there hereafter to be holden, with his or their Merchandizes, Goods, and Wares, there to buy and sell, and make their exchange freely at his or their pleasure, without exaction, fine, imposition, extortion, or contribution to be had, leavied, taken, or perceived of them, or of any of them, to, for, or by any English person or persons to his or their own use, or to the use of the said Fraternity or Fellowship, or of any other like, except only of ten Mark sterling. And that no person English, as is afore rehearsed, hereafter take to his own use, or to the use of the said Fraternity or Fellowship thereof, any other English person of what estate degree, or condition that he be of, so alway that he be the King our Soveraigne Lords true Leigeman, any fine, exaction, imposition, or contribution for his liberty or freedome to buy and sell Goods, wares, or Merchandizes in or at any of the said Marts, more or above the said summe of ten Mark sterling only, upon paine of forfeiture to our Soveraigne Lord for every time that he doth the contrary of this Act 20. l. and also to forfeit to the parties so grieved in this behalfe tenne times so much as he contrary to this present Act, taketh of him: And that the parties so aggrieved shall have in this behalfe an Action of debt for the said forfeiture of tenne times, in any of the Kings Courts within this Realm by writ, Bill, Plaint, or Information, and such processe to be made in the same, as is or ought to be made in or upon an Action of debt at the Common Law, and the triall thereof to be had in such Shire, City, or Place, where the said Action is commenced or sued; and that the Defendant in any Action bee not admitted to wage his Law, nor none Essoine or Protection be for such Defendant admitted or allowed in that behalfe.

This Act of Parliament is in full force and validity to this day; for there is none can deny, that the vertue of an Act of Parliament is such, that no Power can repeale or abrogate it, but the same Legislative Power that made it. Now that a private Charter procured by gratuities, favour, and other clandestine wayes (as shall be proved) should have power to suspend and stop the execution of an Act of Parliament, we beleeve no Iudge in the Land will affirme, especially considering that this Charter doth authorize a few men to exercise both at home and abroad an extrajudiciall sway both over the consciences, the bodies, and estates of his Majesties leige people, by oathes, imprisonments, amercements, and taxes.

Touching the Oath they use to impose, it runs thus, being couched in this odde forme.

YOu sweare by Almighty God, to be good and true to our Soveraign Lord the King that now is, and to his Heires, and Successours, Kings of this Realme. You shall be obedient and assistant to Mr Governour or his Deputy, and Assistants of Merchant-Adventurers in the parts of Holland, Zealand, Brabant, Flanders, and within the Townes and Marches of Calais, as also in East Freezland, or any other Countrey or place on this or that side the seas, where the said Company are or shall be priviledged. All Statutes and Ordinances not repealed, which have beene made, or shall be made by the said Governour, or his Deputy and Fellowship, you shall to your best knowledge truly bold, and keep no singular regard to your selfe in hurt or prejudice of the Common wealth of the said Fellowship, or else being condemned, and orderly demanded, shall truly from time to time content and pay unto the Treasurer for the time being, all and every such mulcts and penalties which have and shall be limited and set for the transgressors and offenders of the same. The secrets and privities of the aforesaid Fellowship you shall heal, and not bewray: and if you shall know any person or persons that intend any hurt, harme, or prejudice to our Soveraigne Lord the King, or unto his Lands, or to the Fellowship aforesaid, or the priviledges of the same, you shall give knowledge thereof, and doe it to be knowne to the said Governour or his Deputy. And you shall not colour or free any Forreigners goods, which are not free of this Fellowship of Merchant-Adventurers of England. So help you God.

By the words of this extravagant Oath, one may fee what high, illegall and transcendent power they assume to themselves to make Statutes, which is proper and peculiar only to Parliaments: Moreover, they stile themselves a Commonwealth, in so much that though they cannot be termed Regnum in Regno, they may be well termed Dominium in Dominio. Besides this Oath there is another called the purging Oath, whereby one is bound to confesse whether he hath offended in such and such particulars, and to accuse himselfe, which is point blank against Law, being a thing abhorring to nature; and for which kinde of Oath some of our Courts were lately put downe by this present Parliament; and touching their Impositions and Fines, they lay them ad libitum, which they convert afterwards to their owne benefit, whereas the King de jure partakes of all Fines: but they passed an Order, by which (to use their owne words) they were pleased to allow him the one moity; The true copy of which Order shall be inserted here with others, by which one may guesse at the rest.

At a Court holden March 4. 1603.

THe Brethren of this Company assembled together, doe hold it very requisite, for the better carriage of their Trade, that suite should be made unto the Kings Majesty, by the meanes of my Lord Chancellor to be preferred, that in the confirmation of the Companies Charters of Priviledges, this also might be added and inserted, that the Company, in their Courts as well in England as beyond the Seas to bee holden, may impose reasonable fines and penalties upon such Subiects of this Realme, not free of this Company, that shall ship Woollen Commodities into the Countreys and Places where they are priviledged, thereby to cause such intruding subiects to desist from that trade, which properly appertains to the Company of Adventurers. In consideration whereof, and in hope of the more favour in some other suites they meane to move hereafter, they are pleased that the Kings Maiesty may have and receive the one moity of all such fines and penalties as shall be imposed upon such intruders; and further they agreed to yeeld to his Maiesty, in respect aforesaid, an annuall Rent of 50 l. or 100 Marks per annum.

As before by the recited Act, so likewise by this order it appeares that Merchants would not submit nor come into their Companie (as they had just cause so to doe) therefore suit must be made to suppresse them, but the illegall power which the Companie used, begat a Petition for free Trade in Parliament against the Companie, in Anno 1606, which was judged in that Supreme Court so just and right, that there passed a Bill for a generall libertie of trade, with great applause of the House, scarce fortie dissenting from it. But the Companie finding that the said Bill would have dissolved their Patent, they made a crosse presumptuous Order, which for that they have dared to doe, they may be truly termed Adventurous Merchants.

At a Court holden April 5. 1606.

THe Bill of generall liberty of Trade was now read, and this Court hath consented that learned Councell shall be entertained, and the enormities of the Bill laid open, with a manifestation of the necessity of a government in Trade. It is also further agreed, that all reasonable charges expended about the crossing of that Bill shall be defrayed by the Treasurer here.

The transcript of this oath and orders were truly extracted out of their owne Register, and is concordant with the originall. Touching the first, which is a kinde of oath of allegiance unto them, and hath touched the consciences of some, it is worth the observing how they mention a power they have to make Statutes, and it is proper for them so to doe, if they be a Commonwealth, as they terme themselves in the same Oath. And for the orders by these and the following, one may finde upon what a tottering foundation their Charter stands, and by what indirect meanes they support it, being borne by strength of Purse and Court Donatives, which in true English are but complementall bribes, which dare not appeare among their publique accompts, as is obvious by the following order.

At a Court holden Decemb. 23. 1622.

ACcording to the Order of the generall Court, this day they tooke into consideration the businesse of the Accompt required by the Commissioners, which this Court concerning to be a matter that may concerne divers great personages whom the Company have upon divers occasions presented with gratuities: It is not thought meet to give any such accompt as may any way touch the said great Personages, but rather to a void the accompt by some good courses, to which end it is agreed that Master Governour and Master Deputy, or one of them, doe take some such course as they shall thinke convenient.

At a Court holden Novemb. 16. 1623.

THe Court had consideration according to the season of the yeare, of their yearly presents to such Honourable Personages as they have received favours from; and first forasmuch as they have beene extraordinarily bound to the favours of the Lord Treasurer, the remembrance it now to be enlarged at Newyeares tide, and that they shall present his Lordship with 200. peeces of 22.s in gold, and a peece of Plate, as an acknowledgement of his Lordships speciall favours.

  • Moreover, to the Lord Duke of Buckingham.
  • To the Archbishop of Canterbury.
  • To the Lord Treasurer.
  • To the Lord Keeper.
  • To the Lord President.
  • To Mr. Secretary Calvert.
  • To Mr. Comptroller, &c.

Having made it apparent by the premisses how this fraternity of Ingrossers is repugnant to all Laws both of Nature, of Nations, and of those of this Kingdome, as not being able to produce any municipall right thereunto; it remaines now to prove further, that this selfe-enriching society derogates from the repute and honours of the English Nation abroad, for they are esteemed (as indeed they are) no other then a Monopoly, which being odious every where makes them lose both love and respect as well in Germany as the Netherlands, for though they enjoy some immunities where they come for their diet and lodging, it is not for any love unto them, but for the encrease of Customes and other advantages they bring along with them to that particular place. And it is observed, that they setled themselves no where yet, but there hath beene jarring betwixt them and the Towne at last, which hath made them remove their Tents so oft, and shift from place to place: besides there is commonly ill blood bred, and matter of contestation and envie betwixt that Town where they seat themselves, and other circumjacent Towns, as happened of late yeares betwixt Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Out of the precedent discourse and the circumstances thereof, this Inference doth necessarily follow, That the Company of those who stile themselves Merchants Adventurers (in statu quo nunc) take them in the condition they are now in, is not only against the hereditary priviledges, but also a pressure and a grievance of a high nature to the freeborne Subjects of this Realme of England. But in regard it is a common saying, that one tale is good till the other be told, let us examine and answer the arguments they produce for their owne vindication and defence.

The Arguments which the Merchants Adventurers alledge for their justification, may be all reduced to these three heads.

First, they cry up the Antiquity of their Company.

Secondly, the Ability of it.

Thirdly, the Necessity of it.

1. Touching the Antiquity thereof, they affirme their Charter to have beene granted them above 250. yeares past.

2. Touching their Ability, they alledge that they are of sufficient wealth to take up and buy all the White Clothes yearly made in this Realme for readie money; therefore there is no need to have a greater number added to them.

3. Touching the necessitie of their Company, they declare how by meanes of the same, and by their discreet government, the commodities issuing from Wooll have beene highly advanced, alledging that Clothes in the time of King H 7. being worth but 3. 1. are now sold for twice as much. Moreover they say, that if libertie should be granted every man to trade as he pleaseth, the unskilfulnesse of the traders meeting with the subtiltie of the people with whom they are to deale, great losse would ensue thereby to the Subjects of this Kingdome, besides the confusion that would inevitably follow.

To the first of these concerning their Antiquitie it is answered, that

As it is a rule in Divinitie, that Prescription cannot priviledge an errour, no more can it doe in civill government. It is true, when Edw. 3. by his extraordinarie wisedome had procured Cloth to be made so plentifully within this Realme, he incited and stirred up his subjects to the venting of those Clothes by transportation of them to forraine parts, whereby he granted them many favours: and Henry the fourth erected them to a Company that went by the name of a Brotherhood of Tho: Becket, Bp. of Cant. yet with this proviso, that any man paying the Haunce of an old Noble might freely consort and trade with them. But in the reigne of Henry the seventh the said Companie out of self-love and desire of lucre sought to appropriate the said priviledges so granted to all soly unto themselves, and attempted to exclude their Neighbours and Countrimen from the benefit of that trade, contrarie to the freedome and orders of all Mart Townes, which being complained of in Parliament, that famous Statute before inserted was made by that wise Legislator Henry the seventh; whence if one looke backward, he will finde that they cannot plead above 100. yeares antiquitie.

The Staplers were far more ancient, yet we know to what a reformation they submitted themselves; besides, in the carriage of all mundane affaires, the quality of the times, and the face of things doe alter ever and anon. Those Immunities which were granted in the Infancy of trade, to incite people to the encrease and improvement of it, are not so proper for these times, when the Trade is come to that height of perfection, and that the mystery of it is so well known: and it is daily found by experience, that what was good and profitable to a State, by the alteration of times becomes prejudiciall; as for instance, it was lawfull for the Company of Staplers to transport Woolls, but when we attained to the knowledge of making Cloth, it was not good, and therefore prohibited.

Touching the second allegation, that their ability can extend to buy and vend all the Clothes that are made yearly. For the first part of this Argument that concernes their ability, it is too well known by what extrajudiciall, and monopolizing wayes they have thus enabled themselves to swallow up the market; for it hath beene by a constant engrossing of the Trade so many yeares, to the impoverishing and prejudice of their fellow Subjects, and to the feathering only of their owne nests. The strength of a Kingdome consists in the riches of many Subjects, not of a few, in so much that were this Trade enlarged, it would tend to the multiplying of able and wealthy Merchants, it would disperse it to a greater latitude, and further ennobling the Trade, and prevent the encrease of poore men and beggars up and downe the Land: for it is one of the maine reasons why there are fewer beggars seene in Commonwealths then in Kingdoms, because of community and freedome of trading, by which meanes the wealth of the Land is more equally distributed amongst the Natives. But suppose they be able to buy all the Clothes, is it not against common reason, and the Subjects birth-right, that therefore they should be permitted so to doe and others debard.

Concerning the necessity of this Incorporation, it is enforced by a twofold reason.

First, they pretend that the sale of our Manufactures is more advanced, and the esteeme and price thereof borne up by their guidance and government, which is now double from what it was.

For answer, it is true that the rates of our woollen Commodities, as of all other sorts of Merchandize, are much raised from what they were, but this is an act of time, as in all other Countreys where Trade is free, in so long a tract of time, the prizes of all things change, especially since the discovery of the West-Indian Mines, which have so exceedingly encreased the plenty of money through all parts of Europe.

There be divers other reasons why the rates are raised, as the alteration of value in Coines and exchanges. Secondly the raising of Rents. Thirdly the endearment of victuals, which rise still with the encrease of people. And lastly the chiefe reason is, because there hath beene such vent for our Cloth abroad, and that is the maine cause why our Cloth and other woollen Commodities are so much risen; but grant the Company beare up the prices of commodities abroad, may they not by the same power and policy keep up the prices of forreign commodities at home, by which meanes the Kingdome suffers both wayes?

Secondly they say, that if Trade were free, all would suddenly fall to decay, both Merchant and Clothier would be beaten out of trade by the Dutch; for if our Merchants who transport Cloth were not ordered by the Company, they would send such abundance into all parts, as they would not be able to gaine thereby: and so the Merchant would be discouraged to send any more, or if he doe send he will be sure to give the Clothier every time lesse for his Cloth, so that the Clothier nor Merchant will bee able to live by it; and by this overclogging of the market, our Cloth will be brought into dis-esteeme and not so regarded, as it is now by this Government.

This Objection at first fight carrieth a specious shew, but if it be cast into the ballance of truth, it will beare no weight at all, it is rather a conceit then an Argument, for they cannot prove it by any act of experience, only they imagine such a thing. It is confessed that regularity and government is commendable in all things, otherwise disorders and a promiscuous kinde of confusion will follow. The French and Spanish Companies sang the same note before Tertio Iacobi when they were dissolved. There bee generall Lawes to regulate trade, and to preserve it from confusion; we desire still a government, but not a Monopoly, that so few should engrosse the whole masse and bulke of the prime trade of England to two Townes only. Trade (though the comparison be homely) is like Dung, which being close kept in a heap or two stinks, but being spread abroad, it doth fertilize the earth and make it fructifie; nor need we any forraign hands to spread it, wee have enough of our owne were they permitted. Touching the over-glutting of the market, it might well fall out, that if free Traders were confind to two Towns only, they would peradventure surcharge them, but having the choice of so many Ports, and such a variety of places, there is no such feare of a glut. As touching the esteeme and rates of our Cloth, which they pretend would bee prejudiced, let them know, that it is not the high price but plenty that propagates Trade; and for the high rates of our Cloth, we may impute that not so much to their Government, as the policy of the Dutch themselves, who to make Dutch Cloth more vendible, hoise up the price of ours, and that our Cloth and other woollen Commodities are endeared by the Company here, shall be proved afterwards.

There are two main things that conduce to make a trade flourish, plenty of Merchandize and multitude of Merchants. Now it can be proved that in the yeare 1633, before that strict Proclamation for restraint came out, there were neere upon 600 Traders in those commodities: and in the yeare 1639 not above 180; and in Holland before that Proclamation when they made most, they made not above two thousand Clothes yearly, but since they have made some yeares twentie thousand, and they fell also to the making of Perpetuanoes, which they had never done before; so that trade is insensibly stolen away from us, our workmen by hundreds going over to set up their manufactures in other Countries, because they were discouraged to exercise their ingenuitie at home, and have freedome to make away to their best advantage any new-fashioned stuffe, by reason of the said Proclamation of restraint, whereat there was much discontentment abroad, as wel as at home, for Amsterdam and other Townes did stomach extremely, that his Majestie of Great Britaine should exclude them, and that Rotterdam should be only priviledged to be Mistris of the Trade.

But they seeme to object further, that such a generall freedome of trade might give libertie to become Merchants without an apprenticeship, which is an injurie to them that have served, and may hurt them who have not served, who adventuring unskilfully shall be sure of losse.

It is answered, that the losse of the new Merchant may be conceived to be more the hopes then the feares of this Companie. They that have served have the advantage of knowledge and skill for their time and moneys. And touching capacity and skill it might be urged, that by the same reason young Gentlemen should be kept from their sands for want of experience to manure them. But touching apprentices, it is not the least abuse amongst them, that taking such a considerable summe, as two or three hundred pounds with some, it makes the masters lesse careful to expect duty from them, and it makes the Apprentice more presumptuous, and take greater liberty. And on the other side we hope it will appeare, that were there a freedome of trade permitted and published for Holland, Zealand, Flanders, Brabant, East Freezland, West Freezland, Hamburgh, and the territories of the same, and into all Germany, it would not only be a great benefit to this Kingdome in generall, but also an extraordinary incouragement to all active and industrious spirits, to seeke more Ports, and make quicker returns, and wind the penny sooner; whereas the affections of many are now dampt, because they must be subject to the Company in a servile kinde of obedience, and are illegally sworne to obey all their unjust and unorderly Orders, whereof we shall here insert a few.

First, let us take notice of the Taxes and Impositions, which the Merchants Adventurers doe lay or leavie upon all Woollen commodities which they transport, viz.

All Loner white Clothes pay per Cloth 4.s. 6.d.
Short white Clothes per Cloth 3. 0.
Loner coloured clothes Saffron, Kentish and Redding per Cloth 2. 0.
Clothes died & drest forth of Whites per colour 2. 0.
Plunkets 2. 3.
Clothes died and dressed of Spanish making. 2. 0.
Kerseys cont 0. 6.
Elbroad Perpetuanoes per peece 0. 6.
Yardbroad Perpetuanoes 0. 4.0b
Double Bayes 0. 9.
Single Bayes 0. 4.0b
Devons dozens single 0. 4.0b
Northerne dozens double 0. 9.
Northerne dozens single 0. 4.0b
Short Worsted hose for men pay per dozen 0. 4.0b
Long Worsted hose 0. 6.
Woollen hose for men 0. 5.
Woollen hose for children 0. 1.0b
Short Kersey stockings 0. 1.0b
Long Kersey stockings 0. 6.
Meniking bays and Frizidoes per peece 0. 1.0b
Buffins narrow, Moccadoes, and Norwich Grograns per peece 0. 1.0b
Buffins broad Philip and Cheaney 0. 2.q.
Carols of Norwich making 0. 1.0b
Buffins double 0. 4.0b
Cottons the hundred goads 0. 9.
Double Durances and Cameleons 0. 5.
Single of the same cont: 14 yards. 0. 2.0b
Flannell the hundred yards 0. 7.0b
Freezes 0. 9.
Venetian Fustians 0. 3.
Parogans of Norwich mixt and plaine 0. 4.0b
Pyramides and Floramides 0. 2.q.
Porops Damosolos, broad Damas 0. 6.
Middles Sayes broad 0. 9.
Narrow 0. 4.0b
Narrow Linsey Woolsey drest the hundred yards 0. 5.
Cloth Rashes broad per peece 0. 9.
Narrow 0. 4.0b

Now it must be confest that these taxes do endear the goods, and therefore the Company cannot afford as cheap as other Merchants might doe.

Secondly, their order for stinting or limiting their members to transport but a certaine quantitie of Cloth, runs thus.

At a Court holden Octob. 11. 1606.

LEtters from the Brethren of Middleburgh of the fourth of October 1606. were now made publique, they give knowledge that they have agreed to the augmentation of the generall stint, and of the yearly and monethly number of Clothes to be shipped out upon the free licence, referring us to the specification of every mans proportion of stint sent with their letters, and now read; which proportion of stint all the trading Brethren are enjoyned not to exceed within the compasse of any one year, upon the penalty of 40.s. per Cloth. And to prevent abuse, they ordaine every Brother that shall ship any woollen commodity, shall be yearly purged upon his oath, the forme whereof was now sent and read also: and in case any should refuse or neglect to take the said Oath by the last day of August every yeare, then he to pay 20. pound sterling, and to have no benefit of the free Licence till he hath taken the said Oath.

Much might be said of this stinting Order, but we shall say but little for brevitie sake: how prejudiciall it is for any man to be stinted that would trade more freely if he were permitted, is bestknown to the members of that Company, and what an injury it is to the Clothiers, their Petitions depending in this Parliament can sufficiently witnesse.

Thirdly, their order for shipping in no other ships then the Companies Ships, the substance of which Order is as followeth, viz.

27. April 1605. restraint of shipping but onely in two ships, upon paine of forfeiture of 40.s. per Cloth.

Orders of stint revived, and no newes to be sent over of any more Cloth to be sent till hereafter, and men should forbeare wholly shipping for a time.

27. Aprilis 1605. Richard Fox Cloth-worker, condemned to pay 40.s. a Cloth for mis-shipping.

At a Court holden the 11. of September 1605. divers masters of ships made suit for taking in of goods, and were refused, and if any of the Company would lade as could, were restrained by order.

This order tends to the destruction of the Navigation of this Kingdome, and the undoing of sea-faring men, and this is the language of the Parliament in his late Majesties reigne, and the generall complaint of the Mariners now; moreover, to ship in the Companies ships will cost almost double freight, which is no small matter.

Fourthly, their order for shipping but thrice a yeare is to this effect.

At a Court holden the 9 of February 1604. no shipping out of Cloth to Middleburgh but three times in a yeare, February, May, September.

This order is of a threefold prejudice, in generall to the Kingdome, in particular to the Merchant, and especially to the Clothier, who cannot sell but when the Merchant will buy, and the Merchant will not buy but when he may transport, and if he may not transport when he pleaseth, the cloth must lie unfold either upon the Clothier or Merchants hands, which losse of time endeareth the commodities. It is to be feared this Company might for their private lucre also make an Act, that the members of their Company should be stinted in the price they should give for cloth, as well as the quantity they must buy or transport, and indeed they are come very neare to it, as manifestly appears by this following Order.

At a Court holden April. 19. 1634.

MAster Withers did exhibit two severall Papers to this Court to be considered of, concerning what abatements should be made for all defects of Cloth, whether in weight, length, or breadth, as also some points for the ordering of tarre, which he desired might be commended to the Courts of Hamburgh and Delph, that they might consider thereon, and further advise of any other course, and it was accordingly ordered; but the Court of Hamburgh is to be desired to make no Act in this businesse, till they have acquainted this Court with their opinion therein. As for that Mr Withers desired might be considered here, to wit, that no brother should buy any white cloth that is made in Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, Oxfordshire, and the Easterne limits of Somersetshire, without abatements for all faults in which they shall be found defective: It was now by generall advice and approbation ordered and enacted, that every brother of the Company who doth buy cloth contrary to that effect, shall forfeit 20. s. upon every cloth so bought, toties quoties without favour or pardon; and to the end that every brother may bee acquainted with the contents of the said Draught now published, and whereupon this Order is made, it is thought fit that the said Draught be printed, and one given to each brother; but this is to be done after the Lords of his Majesties privy Councell shall have by their Order given countenance to this Act, to which end their Lordships are to be petitioned, and Mr Deputy accompanied with some of the Committees for trade, is appointed to present the same: After these things the Court did take into consideration the paines which Mr Withers hath taken in their businesse the last yeare, and have gratified him with 500 Marks, his time being to end with his accompt the 25 of March, hee did now thankfully accept thereof.

It is worth the observing when this Order was made, even about that time when they had by their often gifts at New years tide, and other left handed meanes, got their Authority to be proclaimed for restraining all Merchants, not free of their Company, from transporting any woollen Commodities, or to pay 100. l. and come in to the Company; then they make this Order to curb the poore Clothier to abate for defects as much as they please; and though that Order was not to bee enacted by them before the Lords of his Majesties privy Councell had given countenance thereunto, yet notwithstanding at a Court holden the 21 of May 1634, the said Order was confirmed without consent of the Lords. Thus wee see how illegally the Company proceeds in their owne Courts, against their owne Orders, and molested the Clothiers by many suites in Law, and not only them, but also others, and were at vast expences to get their own ends.

At a Court holden March. 4. 1634.

THe Committees that were appointed to deale with Mr Withers touching his entertainment, now brought back that businesse to this Court, for that they found his accompt of charges to bee such, as they conceived it meet the Court should be made acquainted therewith before any resolution were taken touching his allowance of the same; for they finde in one yeare, viz. since our Lady day last, being now almost one whole yeare, a matter of 270. l. laid out upon ordinary charges, and about 150. l. laid out in charges of Law suites, whereof some 100 Marks in a Star-chamber suite against Sir Edward Bainton, whereupon the Court had consideration, and conceiving that the Company might bee brought into some disrepute by suits against clothiers, or taking the benefit of forfeitures of penall statutes, but especially might perhaps be brought into some danger for maintaining that suit in the Starchamber, it was for present ordered, that the allowance of Mr. Withers said accompt should for a while be held in suspence untill the Company were well satisfied what to resolve therein. In the meane while because Mr Withers is forthwith to goe into the Country, it was ordered that Mr Treasurer should imprest unto Mr Withers 200. l. upon accompt of his ordinary charges, untill further audit of his accompt, and Mr Deputy and Mr Peter Jones are desired to counsell in the Companies behalfe with Mr Attorney Generall, what is safe and fitting for the Company to doe in bearing or forbearing the meddling with the charge of Lawsuits, upon returne of whose opinion the Court will resolve herein as they shall finde cause.

Here we see the cunning dealing of this Companie, that when they had done their worst in Law, and perceived they could not prevaile, then they seeme to be very cautious to meddle with the accompt of charges.

At a Court holden the 29. of August 1635.

THis Court did proceed to consider of the gratification of Mr. Withers for his lost yeare, and for paiment of his bills of charges in the same, as also for his entertainment for the yeare to come, in which they desired to include his further charges whatsoever, and he not to accompt as hitherto he hath done; and having found that his bill of charges for the last yeare came to 420.l. whereof 150.l. was for Law-suits in the Star-chamber, and other Courts of Iustice, it was agreed and consented unto, that the 270l. for ordinary charges should be paid, but for the other 150.l. they would deferre the payment thereof untill the cause betweene him and Sr Edward Baynton were ended; and if then Mr Withers were loser thereby, then he should have recourse to this Court, who would then further consider thereof.

Note the precedent order, the 150l. expended in Law and Star-chamber suits, Mr Withers must not have untill the Company doth see which way the scale will turne, and if Sir Edward Bainton be cast, then the Company will owne the cause, if not, they will seeme to disclaime it, and finde out some back doore or private way to pay or gratifie Mr Withers.

Fiftly and lastly, the Company tieth their Members to trade to two Towns only, viz. Hamburgh and Rotterdam. First, it is well knowne that to goe to Rotterdam is but the entrance of Holland and other parts, and although the Merchant may transport his commodities as farre againe and deeper into the Countrey for the same freight, yet he may not; neverthelesse before the commodities doe come to the Retailers hands it must be transported from Rotterdam, and then it costs more freight and other charges then is paid from London to Rotterdam: thus unnecessarily they charge our commodities.

Secondly, it is prejudiciall in the highest nature to the sale of our commodities, for the pettie Shopkeepers and Retailers will not come so farre to buy our Commodities. It is too chargeable, costly, and sometimes dangerous travelling, and will not quit cost to travell so farre to buy small quantities. Now this inconvenience is fallen upon it, that the great traders or buyers of our Cloth, which the Dutch call Grossiers, (and it is a proper name for them, because they are engrossers of our Commodities) doe come and buy great quantities together, and when these men are come to Amsterdam and other remote places, then they furnish all those smaller Shopkeepers and other Chapmen with our commodities, and these men get a competent gaine thereby; which if trade were free, our Merchants might gaine so much the more, or afford our Cloth so much the cheaper unto the Retailer, and by cheap selling we should the sooner beat the Dutch from making. But there is a greater harm in it then this; for the chief makers of Cloth in Holland and those parts thereabouts be those great buyers or Grossiers, who aime at ingrossing our cloth for two reasons; first, because they get good gaine upon our commodities in selling them, as aforesaid, to smaller tradesmen; but secondly and principally, to advance the sale of their owne home-made cloth before our English, which is easily done having the sale of both in their owne hands, none can hinder them; and seeing it is so, that the Dutch do make great quantity of cloth and other woollen commodities, there is a far greater necessity of a free trade and selling cheape then heretofore, when the Hollanders made none, or but few; for then it was easie to make them give what price we pleased for cloth; but now we must not onely endeavour to sell our commodities, but should chiefly aime to sell so cheape, as might cause the Dutch to desist from making of cloth.

The greatest bane which ever the commerce of this Kingdome received, was, that the Hollanders and others fell to the making of cloth, and other woollen manufactures; and if the Flemming should come to set up woollen Loomes as the Hollander doth, to what a low ebbe our trade of cloth would sinke unto, it is an easie thing to be a Prophet.

Therefore there is no one thing that requires the policie of England more, then to draw the one, and prevent the other from making of cloth and other woollen commodities in that abundance. Now there is no way under Heaven to doe it but by devising wayes to sell our Manufactures at cheaper rates, and disperse them more up and downe the Countrey, which cannot be otherwise effected then by a free Trade, and multitude of Merchants, and by fitting all places and remote parts with such kind of Manufactures as are most proper for them: These reasons no doubt will give good satisfaction to indifferent men, who (under favour) cannot deny but this Company of Merchant-Adventurers is as prejudiciall to this Kingdome as ever the French or Spanish Companies were, and to prove they were so, it will be requisite here to insert an Act of Parliament in tertio Jacobi, by which they were dissolved; the Act runs thus.

VVhereas divers Merchants have of late obtained from the Kings most excellent Majesty under the Great Seale of England, a large Charter of Incorporation for them and their Company to trade into the Dominions of Spaine and Portugall, and are also most earnest suiters to obtain the like from his said Majestie for France, whereby none but themselves and such as they shall thinke fit, as being meere Merchants, shall take the benefit of the said Charter, disabling thereby all others his Majesties loving Subjects of this Realme of England and Wales, who during all the time of her late Majesties warres were in divers respects greatly charged for the defence of their Prince and Countrey, and therefore ought indifferently to enjoy all the benefits of this most happy peace, and also debarring them from that free enlargement of common Trafficke into those Dominions, which others his Majesties Subjects of his Realmes of Scotland and Ireland doe enjoy, to the manifest impoverishing of all owners of Ships, Masters, Mariners, Fishermen, Clothiers, Tuckers, Spinsters, and many thousands of all sorts of Handy-crafts men, besides the decrease of his Majesties Customes, Subsidies, and other impositions, and the ruine & decay of Navigation, together with the abatement of the prices of our wools, Cloth, Corn, and such like commodities arising and growing within this his said Majesties Realm of England, and the enhancing of all French and Spanish commodities, by reason of the insufficiency of the Merchants, they being few in number, and not of ability to keep the great number of our Ships and Seafaring men a work, and to vent the great store of commodities which this his Majesties Dominion of England, doth yeeld. And by meanes that all Owners and Mariners with divers others (if these Incorporations should continue) shall bee cut off from their ordinary meanes of maintenance and preserving their estates. And finally, by reason that all French and Spanish commodities shall be in a few mens hands: In respect whereof, as for many other manifold inconveniences growing thereby, much hurt and prejudice must needs redound to all his Majesties loving Subjects of this his Highnesse Realme of England, if reformation for the prevention of so great an evill be not had in due time: For remedy whereof, be it enacted by the Kings most Excellent Majesty, the Lords Spirituall and Temporall, and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the Authority of the same, That it shall and may be lawfull to and for all his Majesties Subjects of this his Highnesse Realme of England and Wales, from henceforth at all times to have free liberty to trade into and from the Dominions of Spaine, Portugall, and France, in such sort, and in as free manner as was at any time accustomed sithence the beginning of this his Highnes most happy Reign in this his Realm of England, and at any time before the said Charter of Incorporation was granted, paying to the Kings most Excellent Majesty, his Heires, and Successors, all such customes, and other duties, as by the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme ought to be paid and done for the same. The said Charter of Incorporation, or any other Charter, Grant, Act, or any thing else heretofore made, or done, or hereafter to be done to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding. Provided alwayes, that this Act or any thing therein contained shall not be of force to enable, or give liberty to any person or persons to goe over Seas without licence, who by the Laws and Statutes of this Realme, or by any Statute hereafter to be made, shall be restrained from going beyond the Seas without licence, any thing to the contrary notwithstanding.

Were there nothing more said then what this Act of Parliament relates, it is sufficient to convince any rationall man of the unsufferable wrong the Kingdom receives by such illegall Incorporations: severall Parliaments have found and adjudged them so, and particularly this Company of Merchant-Adventurers, against which there passed also two Votes in full Parliament a little before his late Majesties death, extracted out of the Parliament Records as followeth.

Die Veneris 30. Aprilis, 22 Iacobi.

UPon a Report this day made to the Commons House of Parliament from the generall Committee for Trade, concerning the imprest money set by the Company of Merchant-Adventurers of London upon Cloth, and after long debate thereof in the House, It is resolved and declared by the said House of Commons, that the opinion of the House is, that such setting of the said imprest money upon Cloth is unlawfull, unjust, and a grievance to the people, and is to bee taken off, and no longer to bee continued by them: And upon further Report from the said Committee, and like debate in the said House, It is further declared, that the House thinks fit, that as well the Merchant Adventurers, as all other Merchants promiscuously, may transport to all places all Northern and Western Dozens, Kerfies, and new Manufactures.

H. Elsyng Cler. Dom. Com.

Die Lunæ 10. Maii, 22. Iacobi.

UPon a Report this day made to the House of Commons from the grand Committee for Trade, concerning the freedome of exportation of died, and dressed, and all coloured Clothes into the parts of Germany and the Low Countreys, by other Merchants besides the Merchant-Adventurers, and after long debate thereof in the House, It is resolved and declared by the said House of Commons, that the opinion thereof is, that other Merchants besides the Merchant-Adventurers, may freely trade with died, and drest, and all sorts of coloured Clothes into Germany and the Low Countreys.

H. Elsyng Cler. Dom. Com.

But to this they seeme to object the Ordinance of this present Parliament for the continuance of their Company: This, under correction, cannot hold plea, for the said Ordinance passed with this proviso and clause of reservation by the wisedom of both Houses, That all rights confirmed by Act of Parliament, or ancient Charters, should be thereby saved; so that it is rightly conceived that that Ordinance is not binding nor of a restraining nature.

Therefore it is most humbly desired, that the aforesaid Patent of the Company of Merchant-Adventurers may not be binding to others not free of their Company, in regard it is

  • {Illegall,}
  • {Vnusefull,}
  • {Prejudiciall,}
  • {Abusive.}

It is illegall, because it is repugnant to expresse Acts of Parliaments.

It is against the naturall right and priviledge of free born Subjects, as appeares by Magna Charta, and Petition of right. It is a meere Monopoly both in the intention and the execution, for by paying money the Subject enjoyes his right, and denying payment he is debard of it.

It is a grievance of the highest nature, in regard it gives an extrajudiciall power to imprison the Subject without baile or mainprize, to take away his goods, to contrive and impose oathes, to lay and levy taxes without limitations, and convert them to private profit to the prejudice of others, which is the truest badge of a Monopoly.

It is grounded upon Prerogative, not warranted by Common Law, or Act of Parliament, but directly opposite to all.

The pretence of it is the same that all monopolizing Patents have, viz. Regularity and Conformity, but indeed to usurp a right, and liberty, and to restore it againe for money.

The Patent is obtained by some particular men, without the knowledge or consent of others; and it is a rule that no man is bound to observe that Law, which himselfe consents not to bee made against him.

It is Unusefull, because that this Trade, and every other profession in England, is subject to regularity, either by laudable customes confirmed by Acts of Parliaments, or by Statute Lawes; and it is strange that a Projector should see a better way for regularity of trade, then ever was thought on by Act of any Parliament.

That other Merchants have no such need of regularity, onely they are subject in generall to the Lawes and Customes of the Land, yet they flourish and prosper; and in Flanders, Brabant, Artois, Henegow, and other Provinces under the King of Spaine, there hath beene no government by the Company for about fourscore yeares together, yet the trade of our Manufactures thrive farre better there, then in Holland, or Germany where regulation in trade hath beene, and our Nation is farre more beloved and respected.

That those moneys which are leavied, are not any wayes employed for the benefit of King or Kingdome, or for bettering the Trade, but serve only for bribes to preserve the ill-begotten Patent, and punish such as endeavour to enjoy their naturall right against the said Patent, which ends with this odde clause, That every thing in it shall be taken, construed, and adjudged most strongly against us (that is the King) our Heires, and Successors, and most benignly, favourably, and beneficially for the said Governour, Assistants, and Fellowship of Merchant-Adventurers.

The Patent is prejudiciall and abusive, for that they have done and doe this Kingdom the greatest detriment that ever befell it in point of trade, by instigating the Dutch to make a vertue of necessity, by making them fall to the draping of Cloth and other woollen Manufactures, out of the hatred they conceive to their Monopoly. It is too well knowne what clashings and contestations have happened from time to time betweene them. To instance in one amongst others, about the yeare 1634 there was such a contention betwixt them and the Dutch about Tare, that the Company kept their ware-houses shut up about seven or eight months, which made the Dutch, in meere despight, to set up his looms and to fall a draping, and so continueth.

But were it not for the restraint they make, and the power they arrogate to themselves of appointing the place where, the proportion what, the manner how, the time when our woollen Manufactures should be transported, the Gentleman would have more Clothiers for his wools, the Clothier would have more Merchants for his cloth, and the Merchant would have more chapmen for his ware.

And although the Company receive some Immunities from the Towne where they seat themselves, yet are they prejudiciall to the Kingdom in generall, for in lieu thereof those Dutch in London and other places, who terme themselves members of the Intercourse, receive the like Immunities here. And observable it is, that though the Company have such priviledges both at home and abroad, whereby they engrosse the trade of the Kingdome in such a high measure, yet are they liable to pay no greater taxes then others that have neither Charter nor priviledge. If they will have all the trade, it is reason they should pay all the taxes; but they are farre from paying more then ordinary taxes, although the taxes which the Company receives from their members are extraordinary; for as it is extracted out of their owne books, that from the yeare 1616 to 1641 they received in taxes 182295.l. and odde moneys, besides what they received beyond the seas.

The Company of Merchant-Adventurers doe keep up their Patent for one of these three reasons,

Either { for the generall good of this Kingdom,
{ for the benefit of Merchants in generall,
{ for the profit of their particular members.

To the first, if it were good for this Kingdom in generall, it is almost impossible but this Company would have beene established by Law, the conveniences and inconveniences thereof having been so oft debated in Parliaments, as is clearly proved for above 150 yeares past; but on the contrary, it never was complained of, but it still was condemned by the wisedom of the Kingdom, and freedom declared for all Merchants to trade.

To the second, if it were for the benefit of Merchants in generall, then for a certaine those Merchants of old time, and the succeeding ages, and the Merchants of these times would not have opposed and complained of them (as it appeares they have) but they would have soone discerned the benefit, which would have been sufficient inducement for Merchants to have joyned with the Company, and needed not to have been forced or beaten into that which is for their owne profit, nor need the Company constrain Merchants to grow rich against their will, especially by indirect meanes.

To the third, if it be for the profit of their particular members (as it cannot be otherwise conceived) then no doubt, but the Company will speed as in former Parliaments, which God grant.

For were there a freedome of Trade, it would be the onely meanes to cause the Dutch to desist from making of Cloth; and there is nothing that conduceth more to the inlargement of selling any commodity then cheapnesse, for the Dutchman alwayes goeth to the cheapest, though from a Christian to a Iew.

All the premises impartially considered, it is humbly conceived, that it will stand with the policie of this Kingdome to disanull, and cancell the Patent of those that ascribe unto themselves the sole name of Merchants-Adventurers, in regard it is already proved illegall, unusefull, prejudiciall, and abusive.

To conclude, this is not a new Complaint, but an old grievance, having been petitioned against above 150. yeares agoe, and complained of since from time to time, and in this present Parliament there are Petitions depending against the Company, as a Nationall grievance, of Merchants of London, the Clothiers of Worcester, Essex, Suffolke, Norfolke, Kent, Colchester, Norwich, &c. Whereupon it pleased the Honorable House of Commons to appoint a Committee to consider of the Pattent of the said Merchants Adventurers, who being permitted to bring in their learned Counsell, yet they could not prove the legallity thereof.

Thus without any aime of particular interest, but for the generall welfare of the Kingdome, with sincere hearts, and out of the deepest sence of sorrow and griefe of mind, having long observed their miscarriages, we are emboldened to present this generall grievance, as being thereunto bound by a two-fold tye of duty. First, as free-borne Subjects of this Kingdome our birth-right and hereditary Priviledges are neerly concerned, and therefore we ought in conscience to endeavour to preserve them for our posterity, as they have been transmitted to us.

Secondly, for that by the Protestation and Covenant lately taken by us at command of this Parliament, we are againe ingaged so to doe: And truly those two vowes (if remembred) will cause every true-hearted man at least to pray for that which hee is bound to defend and maintaine with the utmost hazzard of his life and fortunes.

FINIS.

Endnotes

 [* ] Which yet hath beene lately questioned in Parliament as a Monopoly, & their Charter there disclaimed by themselves as illegall.

 


8.23. John Lilburne, Respecting the Power of Disposing of the Militia (30 August, 1645)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Lilburne, In the 150 page of the book called, An exact collection of the Parliaments Remonstrances, Declarations, &c. published by speciall Order of the House of Commons, March 24. 1642 we find there a Question answered fit for all men to take notice of in these times.

Estimated date of publication

30 August, 1645.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 393; Thomason 669. f. 10. (33.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

In the 150 page of the Book called, An exact collection of the Parliaments Remonstrances, Declarations, &c. published by speciall Order of the House of Commons, March 24. 1642. we find there a Question answered fit for all men to take notice of in these times.

Question.NOw in our extreame distractions, when forraigne forces threaten, and probably are invited, and a malignant and Popish party at home offended? The Devill hath cast a bone, and rais’d a contestation between the King and Parliament touching the Militia. His Majestie claims the disposing of it to be in Him by the right of Law; The Parliament saith, Rebus sic stantibus, and no. lenti Rege, the ordering of it is inthem?

Answer.VVHich Question, may receive its solution by this distinction. That there is in Laws an equitable, and a litterall sence. His Majesty (let it be granted) is intrusted by Law with the Militia, but it’s for the good and preservation of the Republick, against Forraign Invasions or domestick rebellions. For it cannot be supposed that the Parliament would ever by Law intrust the King with the Militia against themselves, or the Common wealth, that intrusts them to provide for their weal, not for their wo. So that when there is certain appearance or grounded suspition, that the Letter of the Law shall be improved against the equitie of it (that is, the publick good, whether of the body reall or representative) then the Commander going against its equity, gives liberty to the Commanded to refuse obedience to the Letter: for the Law taken abstract from its originall reason and end, is made a shell without a kernell, a shadow without a substance, and a body without a soul. It is the execution of Laws according to their equity and reason, which (as I may say) is the spirit that gives life to Authority the Letter kils.

Nor need this equity be expressed in the Law, being so naturally implyed and supposed in all Laws that are not meerly Imperiall, from that analogie which all bodies Politick hold with the Naturall; whence all government and Governours borrow a proportionable respect; And therefore when the Militia of an Army is committed to the Generall, it is not with any expresse condition, that he shall not turn the mouths of his Cannons against his own Souldiers, for that is so naturally and necessarily implyed, that its needlesse to be expressed, insomuch as if he did attempt or command such a thing against the nature of his trust and place, it did ipso facto estate the Army in a right of disobedience, except we think that obedience binds Men to cut their own throats, or at least their companions.

And indeed if this distinction be not allowed, then the legall and mixt Monarchy is the greatest Tyranny, for if Laws invest the King in an absolute power, and the Letter be not controled by the equity, then whereas other Kings that are absolute Monarchs and rule by will, and not by Law, are Tyrants perforce Those that rule by Law and not by will, have hereby a Tyranny confer’d upon them legally, and so the very end of Laws, which is to give bounds and limits to the exorbitant wils of Princes, is by the Laws themselves disappointed, for they hereby give corroboration (and much more Justification) to an arbitrary Tyranny, by making it legall, not assumed; which Laws are ordained to crosse not countenance: and therefore is the letter (where it seems absolute) alwayes to receive qualification from the equity, else the foresaid absurdity must follow.

It is confessed by all rationall men, that the Parliament hath a power to annull a Law, and to make a new Law, and to declare a Law, but known Laws in force and unrepealed by them, are a rule as long as they so remain for all the Commons of England whereby to walk; and upon rationall grounds is conceived to be binding to the very Parliament themselves as well as others. And though by their legislative power they have Authority to make new Laws, yet no free man of England is to take notice (or can he) of what they intend till they declare it: neither can they, as is conceived, justly punish any man for walking closely to the known and declared Law, though it crosse some pretended Priviledge of theirs, remaining onely in their own breasts.

For where there is no Law declared, there can be no transgression; therefore it is verie requisite that the Parliament would declare their Priviledges to the whole Commons of England, that so no man may through Ignorance (by the Parliaments default run causelesly into the hazard of the losse of their lives, liberties, or estates: for here it is acknowledged by themselves, that their power is limited by those that betrust them; and that they are not to do what they list, but what they ought, namely, to provide for the peoples weal, and not for their wo: so that unknown Priviledges are as dangerous, as unlimited Prerogatives, being both of them secret snares, especially for the best affected people.

It is the greatest hazard and danger that can be run unto, to disart the onely known and declared rule; the laying aside wherof, bring: in nothing but will and power, lust and strength, and so the strongest to carrie all away; for it is the known, established, declared, and unrepealed Law, that tels all the free men of England, that the Knights and Burgesses chosen according to Law, and sent to make up the Parliament, are those that all the Commons of England (who send and choose them) are to obey.

But take away this declared Law, and where will you find the rule of Obedience? and if there be no rule of obedience, then it must necessarily follow, that if a greater and stronger number come to a Parliament sitting, and tell them that they are more and stronger then themselves, and therefore they shall not make Laws for them, but they will rather make Laws for them, must they not needs give place? undoubtedly they must.

Yea take away the declared, unrepealed Law, and then where is meum & &illegible; and libertie, and propertie? But you will say, the Law declared, binds the people, but is no rule for a Parliament sitting, who are not to walk by a known Law. It is answered: It cannot be imagined that ever the people would be so fortish, as to give such a power to those whom they choose for their Servants; for this were to give them a power to provide for their wo, but not for their weal, which is contrary to their own foregoing maxime; therefore doubtlesse that man is upon the most solid and firm ground, that hath both the letter and equity of a known declared, and unrepealed Law on his side, though his practise do crosse some pretended Priviledge of Parliament.

And whereas by an Act made this present Parliament, Anno. 17 Caroli Regis, intituled,

An Act for Regulating of the Privie Councell, and for taking away the Court, commonly called, The Star-Chamber.

It is there declared, that the proceedings, Censures, and Decrees of the Star-Chamber, have by experience been found to be an intolerable burthen to the Subjest, and the means to introduce an Arbitrary power and Government, and that the Councell-Table have adventured to determine of the estates, and liberties of the Subject, contrarie to the Law of the Land, and the rights and priviledges of the Subject. Which Laws are there recited, as first Magna Carta, and the 5 Ed. 3. 9. and 25 Ed 3. 4. and 28 Ed. 3. 3. the last of which saith that it is accorded, assented, and established, that none shall be taken by Petition, or suggestion made to the King or His Councell, unlesse it be by Indictment, or presentment of good and lawfull people of the same neighbourhood, where such deeds be done, in due manner, or by Processe made by Writ originall at the Common Law, and that none be put out of his franchise or Free-hold, unlesse he be duly brought in, to answer, and fore-judged of the same, by the course of the Law; and by another Statute made in the 42 Ed. 3. 3. it is there inacted, that no man be put to answer without presentment before Justices, or matter of Record, or by due Processe and Writ originall according to the old Law of the Land.

Therefore for the Subjects good and welfare in future time, it is inacted, that from henceforth no Court, Councell, or place of Judicature shall be erected, ordained, constituted, or appointed within this Realm of England, or dominion of Wales, which shall have, use, or exercise the same, or the like jurisdiction, as is, or hath been used, practised, or exercised in the said Court of Star-Chamber.

From the equity and letter of which Law, it is desired that our learned Lawyers would answer these insuing Quæries.

First, whether the letter and equity of this Law, do not bind the very Parliament themselves during the time of their sitting, in the like cases here expressed to the same rules here laid down? Which if it should be denied. Then secondly, whether the Parliament it self, when it is sitting, be not bound to the observation of the letter and equity of this Law, when they have to do with free-men, that in all their actions and expressions have declared faithfulnesse to the Common-wealth? And if this be denied, Then

Thirdly, whether ever God made any man lawlesse? or whether ever the Common-wealth when they choose the Parliament, give them a lawles unlimited power, and at their pleasure to walk contrary to their own Laws & Ordinances before they have repealed them.

Fourthly, whether it be according to Law, Justice, or equity, for the Parliament to imprison or punish a man for doing what they command him, and by oath injoyn him?

Fiftly, whether it be legall, just, or equall, that when free-men do endeavour according to their duty, oath and Protestation, to give in Information to the Parliament of Treason acted and done by Sir John Lenthall, against the State and Kingdom, and long since communicated to severall Members of the House of Commons, but by them concealed and smothered; And now by God providence brought upon the stage again, and during the time that Inquisition is made of it before the Committee of Examination, before any legall charge be fixed upon Sir John Lenthall, or he required to make any answer or defence, that he shall be present to out-face, discourage, and abuse the Informers and witnesses in the face of the Committee, without any check or controll from them?

And sometimes while they are sitting about the Examination of his Treason, that he shall sit down beside them with his hat on, as if he were one of them, and that he shall injoy from the Committee ten times more favour and respect then the just, honest, and legall Informers against him; who by some of the Committee themselves while they are sitting, are threatned, jeered, nicknamed, and otherwayes most shamefully abused.

Yea and the friends of the Informers for the State are kept without doors, and the friends of the accused admitted to come in alwaies without controll; and during the Examination of the Information, that the Committee shall refuse to remove the Informers out of Sir John Lenthals custody of Kings-Bench to another prison, although they have been truly informed, that he hath set instruments on work to murther them, and also importuned to remove them.

Sixtly, whether it be not most agreeable to Law, Justice, and equitie, that seeing Sir John Lenthall having so many friends in the House concerned in the busines, that he should not rather be tried by the same Councell of Warre in London, where Sir John Hotham and his Son were, then at the Parliament, his principall crime being against the Law Marshall as theirs was.

 


8.24. John Lilburne, Englands Miserie and Remedie (14 September, 1645)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

[John Lilburne], England’s Miserie, and Remedie in a Judicious Letter from an Utter-Barrister to his speciall Friend, concerning Leiutenant Col. Lilburn’s imprisonment in Newgate, Sept: 1645.

Estimated date of publication

14 September, 1645.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 396; Thomason E. 302. (5.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

ENGLAND’S MISERIE, AND REMEDIE, IN A JVDICIOVS LETTER from an Utter-Barrister to his speciall Friend, concerning Leiutenant Col. LILBURN’S Imprisonment in Newgate, Sept. 14 1645.

Kind Sir:

OUt of the firme confidence and certain knowledge which you see me to have of the integrity and honesty of Lieutenant Colonel Lilburne, and that his Letter of the 25.th of July, containes nothing but truth, I send you here my Sense and Opinion concerning his Imprisonment.

And for the clearer explanation of what you demand, and out better understanding of one another, J conceive it necessary that we be at a point upon these two things. First, what the House of Commons is; Next, for what end and purpose they are conveened and called together.

J beleeve you agree with me, that the House of Commons is nothing lesse, then the representative body of the People, elected and sent up, by the severall Shires and Burrought respectively (and joyned with the two other States) of capacitie to make alter, abrogate Lawes, as occasion shall-requite; to heare and relieve the Grievances of the people, and to reforme what is &illegible; in the Common wealth.

Here is the Character and description of the House of Commons (which themselves (I thinke) will allow of) and heart is the end and purpose for which they serve.

In this description you may plainly see, two Bodies of the people, the representative and the represented, which together make up the body of the Common-wealth; and of this later, Lieutenant Colonel Lilburne is an eminent member.

Now, for any man to imagine that the shadow or representative is more worthy then the Substance, or that the House of Commons is more valuable and considerable, then the Body for whom they serve, is all one as if they should affirme, that an Agent or Ambassadour from a Prince, hath the same or more authority, then the Prince himselfe, which in matters of Proxie for Mariage, I believe no Prince will allow of.

J will not undertake to define the limits of power or extent of Parliaments, having found the practice in my reading more or lesse, lengthned or shortned (like a paire of Stirrops) according to circumstances, and Current of times, or the weaknesse or power of the Prince under whom they serve, who hath for the most part subjected them to his will, and made them act his Designes.

Neither will I goe about to cast the apple of Division &illegible; the People and their agents, who should be linekt together by common interest and mutuall respects of common preservation; yet this much I cannot forbeare to intimate, that the one is but the servant of the other, the House of Commons, I means of the People, elected by them to provide for their welfare and freedomes, against all in-bred tyrannie or Foraigne invasion, which by reason of their numbers, they cannot conveniently doe in their owne persons without hazard both of confusion and desolation.

But to come to our businesse, Mr. Lilburne complains, that Three times since the first of May last, he hath been imprisoned by Authority from the House of Commons, before he knew his Accuser or Accusation, or was suffered to speak one word in his own defence: Certainly, Theeves and Murtherers, taken in Flagranti delicto, in the very act of a haynous crime, are not thus hardly dealt withall.

This cals to my mind the very words of a Member of the House, Mr. Edward Stephens by name, uttered with passion openly in Westminster hall, in a case of the like injustice, viz. That we have not withdrawne our selves from our obedience to the King, to yeild our selves slaves and vassalls to the Tyrannie of our fellow subjects.

But you will say. How shall we mend our selves, we have given our selves, lives, liberties, and all into the Parliaments power?

To this I answer, That this free and abandoned confidence of ours, whereby they are intrusted with all that is deare and precious unto us, ought the rather to &illegible; them to a tender and conscientious care of &illegible; dispensation of the power.

Besides this &illegible; or legislative power (which they make use of) is not lent them for the ruine and destruction of our Lawes and Liberties (no more then the Kings Prerogative) but for the edification and strengthning of the same in particular, as well as generall.

The abuse and overflowing of this power, is odious to God and man; for Princes, or what State soever, when they arrogate to themselves an unlimited jurisdiction, do degenerate into Tyrants, and become Hostes humani generis, enemies of mankind.

And the Angels (which would be like to the most high) were by his just judgement changed into the most wretched of all creatures: It belongs to God, and to God alone, to rule by the law of his blessed will.

As for Princes and States, when they break out into exorbitancy, and will be immitators of the power of God, in governing by an uncircumscribed authority, they run themselves into inevitable mischiefs, and the people (whom they serve) into unavoidable inconveniencies, and this comes to passe of necessitie; for every State governed by fantasticall and Arbitrary power, must needs be &illegible; inconstant, and subiect to change; besides, man is naturally ambitious and apt to encroach and usurpe upon the liberty of his inferiours.

Hence is derived that excellent maxim, Melius sub iniquissima lege, quam sub aquissimo arbitro vivere; It is better live under a rigorous and unjust Law, then an Arbitrary government though just, the reason is, because by the first, he is at certainty and knows what he must trust too, the last leaves him uncertaine and so in danger.

But to returne to Lievtenant Collonel Lilburne, who stands imprisoned by a Vote of the House of Commons for refusing to answere to the Committees Interrogatories, before cause shewed of his former imprisonment.

J am informed by some members that this Vote was obtained by Bastwicke surreptitiously, when the House was &illegible; and emptie; and therefore I conceive he may appeale from the House thin and emptie, to the House full and compleat, if this will not be accepted of, why should he not appeale to the people.

For Buchaman an Author without reproach in his Booke (De jure regni apud Scotos concerning the Scottish Lawes) doth boldly and positively affirme, Supremam potestatem esse in Popule, the Supreame power to be in the people.

And before Buchaman, the Common-wealth of Rome (which reinaineth a patterne and example to all âges both for civill and Military government) I say this Common-wealth in its best perfection did allow of this last refuge or appeale to the People.

To this purpose, &illegible; &illegible; an unreproveable Author, speakes in these &illegible; Decad. 5. of his History, C. Flaminites was the first (or one of the first that understanding the Majestie of Rome to be indeed wholly in the people, & no otherwise in the Senate then by way of delegacy or grand Commission, did not stand highly upon his birth and degree, but made his addresse to the multitude, and taught them to know and use their Power over himselfe, and his fellow Senators in reforming their disorders: For this the Commons highly esteemed him, and the Senators as deeply hared him, &c.

But I hope the wisdome and Providence of the Parliament will prevent these extremities; yet I cannot but put them in remembrance, that small sparkles do oftentimes occasion great fires.

And that the English Nation is sensible of nothing more then the breach of their liberties, and of violence offered to the freedome of their persons.

Witnesse the Magna Carta thirty times confirmed by the Princes of this Hand; and witnesse the cheerefull readinesse of the people to serve the publique in this present great quarrell.

And let no man dreams that the Parliament may french boldly thereon without check. A fillie conceit and aggravating the offence; For a dog that devoureth his owne kind, we account more unnaturall, then a Lyon or a Beare of another kind; besides the heare burning which is easily kindled when our owne fellowes domineere over us.

There are but two things of ruing a people either by feare or love, the first may be more agreeable to &illegible; Carbits as sittable to his pollant and imperious nature, or to Sir Robert Pyes Canine humour, but is brittle, and will last no longer then the some which supports it, The second of love, is safe and durable.

Camillus the Roman speakes of it in two words, Firmissimum imperiane quo obediences gardent, the most stable lasting government under which the people rejoyce and live cheerfully.

But Lilburnes case is singular, that a member of the body represented. &illegible; borne subject, in life and conversation without exception. Considerable both in his actions and sufferings in this great Cause, that such a subject contrary to the tennor of Magna Carta, contrary to the late Covenant and Petition of Right, yea and the direct rule alleaged in Scripture, should be three times imprisoned without shewing cause by a Parliament professing reformation, and defence of our Lawes and Liberties, and without any urgent or apparent necessity of State enforcing it.

This I professe is to me a riddle beyond all that this monstrous age hath brought forth; I need not say how much the publique libertie, is wounded in the injurie doubled and trebled upon their fellow member, nor the consequences thereof, which if drawne into president, who can count himselfe free? Nor the consequences of a wicked sentence, (which as Chancellor Racon sayes) is infinitely worse then a wicked fact, as being held a president or parterne, whereby oppression beginning upon one, is extended as warrantable upon all.

And this conclusion he draweth out of this place of Scripture, Fons turbatus pede et vena corrupta, est justu cadens caram impio. A just man falling into the hands of the wicked, is like a fountaine troubled with the foot, or the urines corrupted in the bodie.

The horror of this sentence hath stricken the generality of the people with amazement, to behold the Kid seething in the milke of the Damme, that is to say, the Chambers of justice ordained for our comfort, preservation, and safety, unkindly wrested to enslave, ruine, and destroy us.

Surely after-ages when they shall ponder these proceedings in cold and sober blood will be ashamed to own the actors for these parents or predecessors: And it is to be seared that the &illegible; from the pavement, will rise in judgement one day against the abusers of the trust committed unto them.

And let no man deceive himselfe, to thinke with sencelesse and frivolous distinctions to award the dishonour and danger, which may arise to the Parliament hence; at to say that the Great Charter is but suspended as to Lilburns, but not abrogated; and that the duty of the Parliament is to provide for generalities, but is not at leysure to attend particular grievances; these answeres satisfie none but Ideots, or those that suck profit under their command.

I mentioned before the danger and dishonour arising to the Parliament hereby, which of necessity must ensue, for seeing that &illegible; Imperium in &illegible; et &illegible; parentium &illegible; Plinum, &illegible; All lawfull Empire or Soveraigne command hath its basis or firme foundation in the consent, approbation and good liking of the people; a rule without exception.

What consent or good liking can bee expected from those who dayly see themselves abused, in their liberties; and ruined in their Estates? Nay, what hope of redresse, when as our Petitions will not be accepted without great friends in the House? To be short, it is not credible that either people or person, in any outward condition under which they mourne, sigh, or groane, will continue any longer therein, then they have occasion of good termes to be delivered, according to the saying of Liv. lib. 8. Non credibile est &illegible; Populum, vel &illegible; denique, in ed conditione, cujus eum &illegible; diutius quam &illegible; fit &illegible; Hence it must necessarily follow, that the multicade toucht to the quick in their liberties and means of living, will be easily perswaded to shake off all Bonds of obedience, so necessary to the Magistrate; and to cast the blame of their sufferings upon the Authors, either as false to their Trust, or uncapable of the great weight of Authority committed unto them: For who but a mad-man will yeild obedience unto those, who are regardlesse of their Lawes and Liberties, or negligent of the means of their Subsistance, Livelihood, and Safety? the maine and only ends for which they are Conveened and called together; and not to provide Offices for themselves, or to sollicite the Causes of their particular friends, sometimes the greatest Enemies of the State.

I beseech you passe not lightly by these Considerations as idle and vaine feares; for who shall hinder the multitude, if stung with a lively sence of their lost Freedoms, and means of subsisting; they shall endeavour the re-gaining thereof by some sudden attempt; seeing that (if the worst happen) they cannot be in much worse condition then they now are: As to the Committee for Examinations (mentioned in Mr. Lilburns Letter) which ought to be the Touchstone, whereby to discern Gold from counterfeit: And in equity and reason, ought to be free, equall, and open as well to the Plantisse, as Defendant; especially in Criminall Causes: But in cases of Treason, or which concern the Publique safety, ought rather to lend an attentive care to the Delators or Accusers, then any way to discourage them: For if these necessary evilla shall be disheartned, who will watch over the safety of the State? Besides, it is more safe and tollerable in the condition wherein we now are, that a mischief should happen to one man, then a ruine to the whole Kingdome.

As to this Committee, I wish from my soule, that Leiurenant Colonell Lilbvrne were the only complainant against them: Let Westminster-Hall, the Exchange, and other places of Publique meeting, inform you; What making of sides, browbeating of witnesses, baffeling of evidences, facing, and out-facing of the truth? What impertinent distinguishing and abusing the Formalitias of the Law, is there complained of? And all this noise and turmoile to help a knave out of the briers.

It were more for the honour of their justice, and the satisfaction of the people, if the usuall forms of proceeding in cases of charge of Tresion were observed: That is, that the person accused, were secured; and the accusers heard with all equanimity, patience, and attention: Whereat on the contrary, the accused is permitted to sit down covered, as Peer and companion with the Commissioners, and to arraign his accusers.

O wretched times! O miserable England! which doest labour with all the symptoms, marks, and tokens, of a declining and dying state! Injustice avowed; Treason, countenanced; Oppression, become familiar, almost legall; Oaths, Protestations, and Covenants solemnly made in the presence of God and man, slighted, and set at nought: Then to fill up the measure of our sorrowes, a Civill War within our own bowels, nay almost in every family: And last of all, a generall corruption of manners, which assures us the malady will be lasting if not incureable: What will be the end and issue of all this? Seeke to that Oracle which cannot lye.

Propter injustitiam, et injurias, et contumelias et diversos dolos: &illegible; a gente in &illegible; transfertur, Ecclesiasticus, Chap. 10. verse 8. Because of unrighteous dealings, injuries and rither got by deceit, the Kingdome is Translated from one people to another.

To the Reader.

CHristian Reader, having a vacant place for some few &illegible; I have made bold to use some of Major George &illegible; his verses out of Vox Pacifica, pag. 199.

Let not your King and Parliament, in One,

Much lesse apart, mistake themselves, for that,

which is most worthy to be thought upon:

Or, think, they are essentially, the STATE;

Let them not fancie, that, th’ Authority

And Priviledges upon them bestown,

Conferred, to set up a Majesty,

A Power, or a Glory, of their own.

But, let them know, t’was for another thing,

Which they but represent; and, which, &illegible; long,

Them, to a strict account, will, doubtlesse, bring,

If anyway, they doe it wilfull wrong:

Par, that, indeed, is, really, the Face,

Whereof, they are the shadow, in the glasse.

Moreover, thus informe them, that, if either,

They, still, divided, grow from bad, to worse;

Or, (without penitence unite together)

And, by their sin, provoke him to that course;

GOD, out of their confusions, can, and will

Create a cure; and vaise a lawfull-power,

His promise to his people to fulfill;

And, his, and their Opposers, to devour.

Yea, bid bath King, and Parliament, make &illegible;,

In penitence, united, to appears:

Lost, into those Confusions, they be cast,

Which will affright them bath; and, make them feare,

And, know, there is, an earth, a greater-thing,

Then, an unrighteous Parliament, or King.

FINIS.

 


8.25. Katherine Chidley, Good Council to the Petitioners for Presbyterian Government (1 November, 1645)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Katherine Chidley, Good Counsell, to the Petitioners for Presbyterian Government, That they may declare their Faith before they build their Church.

Estimated date of publication

1 November, 1645.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 405; Thomason 669. f. 10. (39.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

Good Counsell, to the Petitioners for Presbyterian Government, That they may declare their Faith before they build their Church.

THe Saints of God being separated from Idolatry, and joyned together in the fellowship of the Gospel, have ever enjoyed commission from Christ to practise all the parts of Gods true Religion, and also to keep the Ordinances of God from contempt or profanation amongst themselves. And this power they have from God though with persecution, now, in this time of Parliament. Persecution, I say, not from the Parliament, (further then they neglect to preserve their peace according to the Law of God) but persecution, as it arose from the Pope, and Bishops in former time primarily; so would it do now from their sons, who call themselves Divines, yea, even in the height of it, if they might have their wils, as appeareth by their late Petition, for which there was a publick calling out for hands.

Well was it with the Kings of Israel when they took the counsell of Gods true Prophets though few in number, but such a Clergy which is naturally addicted to persecution cannot be a blessing to any Parliament or Nation, as appeareth by the Scripture. And therefore my desire is, that the Parliament may submit to God for direction and counsell, even to beware of men, especially of false Prophets, or any evill workers what ever they be; And that all persons fearing God, in the City of London, or elsewhere, may blesse God, for fulfilling his promises unto them, that their eyes enjoy their Teachers, though in an upper roome, as Christ and his Apostles met. But for the City of Londons Ministery (which is so much commended in the Petition) I think their readinesse is, as the rest of that generation in the countreys of the Land: even to find out where their maintenance lieth; And so far are they from keeping Gods Ordinances from pollution and contempt, that [to enjoy their pay] they will walk contrary to a known rule, and expresse command; Cast not holy things unto dogs: yet these men (I say) rather then they will want their patrimony, they will constrain all men to partake of the Ordinances of God.

They bewail that the children should come so neer to the birth, and that there is no strength to bring forth: But I think the children are sufficiently brought forth unto them. If their means be established upon them, by the Parliament (as I am informed it is for a certain time:) for I know no other Children they mean, but two: viz: MAINTENANCE and POWER: The one they have as Saul had the fat cattell, contrary to Gods commandment: The other they shall never have: for God will fight against such as fight for them, as it appears at this day: for they by usurped power ever shed the blood of the Saints, and Martyrs of Jesus, and now God is making inquisition for the blood which hath been spilt, and the more fiercely they go on to build up a Babel with blood; the more speedily will God come down to see their wickednes and to confound them.

And though they say it is in fervour of spirit, for the house of their God, and although the Parliament may bear with them, at their entreaty, yet God will (in his own time) deal with sinners.

They further complain, that there are damnable errors broached amongst them, (that is to say, amongst the Presbyterians;) for amongst the people of God none can so soon deliver any point of false doctrine but he shall be severely dealt with according to the rule of Christ;) but the Presbyters practise is to preach what they list without controll, therefore errors may be broached by them privilegio.

But they say, divers are fallen off within these few yeers. But me thinks they do not speak pertinently, for men cannot be said to fall off which were never on, or from a government that was never setled, and they themselves say, their Government is not yet established.

And these that fly out from amongst them, separating themselves from them, and incorporate themselves into separated Assemblies, are not (as they say they be) such as hold damnable heresies, but such abide still amongst the Presbyterians themselves; and therefore the Lords people are constrained (by the power of the Word of truth) to separate themselves from such persons, that are (retained in the Church of England) godlesse in their lives, and blasphemous in their judgements, yet such persons notstithstanding are (in matters of worship) one with the whole body of the Land; and these be the vessels that the houses of their Gods are yet filled with all. But it is not so with those that separate themselves from them: for they admit not in their societies any that hold blasphemous errors, neither do they set up illeterate persons among them for their Pastors, as the Presbyterians unjustly accuse them. True it is, they manage their meetings with boldnesse, because they have some ground to beleeve that the Parliament will not suffer them to be wronged, for performing the true worship, to the true God, in a peaceable manner, under their protection (as also correction in case they should walk as the Presbyterians in their Petition have falsly accused them, saying they manage their meetings with insolencie, which is an unjust accusation; And in contempt of all Authority, which is also untrue: To the disturbance of the City: which is another falshood: Every one doing that which is right in his own eyes: which is an unjust affirmation as the rest) for they order their walkings according to the rule of Gods Word: But these Petitioners accuse not onely the people, but also the Parliament, for they say every one doth that which is right in his own eyes, and there is no controll or course to reclaim them: whereby it is evident, they render the Parliament very infirm, or carelesse. And the people of God plead not any such priviledge to be without controll: but alwayes submitted themselves in duty to the Magistrates power, which is set up by God, as well for the punishment of evill doers, as for the praise of those that do well. Therefore all these Petitioners inferences against the people of God be slanders. And the Religion of God doth not breed division, either in Kingdom, City, or family in any civill respect: for Religion teacheth men submission to their duty. (But this hath been a false accusation of Mr. T. E. long ago, which hath been disproved at large.) Religion (I say) breeds no difference then what was from the beginning, the wicked envying the godly, that their sacrifices are accepted, and theirs rejected, and thats the emnity which Christ hath put between the two seeds, and it shall be as Christ saith, five in a house, two against three, and three against two. But the cause is envy, and not Religion. And whereas these Presbyterians affirm in their Petition that the Separates set up illeterate men to be their Pastors, let that come to the triall, for we desire not to be led by blind guides; Therefore I could wish it might please the Parliament to examine the gifts of such whom these call illiterate (that so it may appear how reasonable we are) either by disputation between the Presbyters and them: or by proving them, to give the sence of any Scripture which they shall appoint; and by this it shall appear whether these Presbyterians are true men: for there is never a Minister of the Separation that feareth to set his foot against any Presbyter whatsoever he be, to dispute the case concerning the matter, ministery, worship, or government of the Church, or any principle of Faith which it shall please the Parliament to call upon them for the managing of, that so it may appear unto all men who are best informed in the mind and will of God, and by this it will also appear who are the Orthodoxall Preachers, and who are the Preachers of new Gospels, and consequently who be the setters of division; and who they be upon whom their scandalous conclusions fall.

And as for Tolerations of all Religions I cannot conceive to be proper; for there is but one true Religion, and that is it which hath Gods Word for their rule.

And for breaking Sabbaths, we know the Christian Sabbath now under the Gospel is the first day of the week (commonly called Sonday) or the Lords day, which we judge our selves bound in conscience to set apart for the worship and service of God by the Rules of Scripture both Law and Gospel; and are also free to submit to the Magistrates command to humble our selves before God in case of eminent danger, and to give him publick thanks for all eminent deliverances, the Magistrates command being grounded upon the Word of God.

Therefore the Presbyterians slandring the people of God, will make their reformation the more difficult; for no man ever set himself up honestly, by accusing of others falsly.

And as touching our Brethren the Scots, we honour them for their parts, and shall remain thankfull unto God for them, or for any help we have received from them; yet we can never submit our consciences to be captivated, or made subject to mens wils: for God onely hath power in that case. Yet I speak freely (for my part) I shall not be offended at whatever lawfull Government the Parliament in their wisdom shall set up in the Nation for the preaching of the Gospel, to bring those thousands, and millions of people, (who yet lie in ignorance) to the knowledge of God, and obedience of the faith, that so they may become fit matter, even living stones to be built to God a spirituall house: for there can be no true reformation in a State of generall Apostasie, but by separating the precious from the vile; and not to impose the worship of God on a people that are not capable, for that will bring a curse rather then a blessing; Therefore the truly godly ought to arise and be doing, and God hath promised to be with them, and they are not to neglect to worship God for want of the command of Authority, as is the manner of many.

Moreover, these take notice that God hath rewarded the beginnings of the Parliaments Reformation; And truly all Christians ought to observe the same; for God useth to reward all those that do his will. And I hope God will still be mercifull to them if Justice be executed by them. And it is to be desired that the wicked may be brought to condigne punishment, and the innocent set free who have lain in prison a long time for worshipping the true God after the true manner, as Mr. Turner hath, who is therefore in prison at Westminster; and others who also suffer in the like case, such out-breakings of envy (I am sure) procure no mercy but judgement.

Now that the Parliament may hasten to set up Christs true discipline which he hath left to his Church; that is and ought to be the desire of all Christians. But that the modell (specified in the Petition) is it, stands the Presbyterians upon to prove. And therefore (in my judgement) it were better for them to make their confession of faith and catechise first, according to the rule of Gods Word, and then shape their Church according to that, rather then shape their Church according to the modell, and their faith according to their Church. Prepare thy work without, and make it fit for thy self in the field: and afterwards build thine house. Prov. 24. 27.

K. C.

 


8.26. Richard Overton, Divine Observations upon the London Ministers Letter against Toleration (24 January, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Richard Overton, DIVINE OBSERVATIONS Upon the London-Ministers Letter against TOLERATION: By his Synoddicall, Priest-byter-all, Nationall, Provinciall, Classicall, Congregationall, Superlative, Un-erring, Clericall, Accademicall Holynesse, Reverend Yongue MARTIN MAR-PRIEST, Sonne, and Heire to Old Martin the Metrapolitane. Wherein the Toleration of His Sacred Person with the whole Independent Fraternity, (by what Name or Title soever dignify’d or distinguished, whether Anabaptists, Brownists, or the like,) is justifyed by the Rea|sons of the London-Ministers, which they urge against Toleration; and themselves, by their own Reasoning, condemned.

Psal. 7. 15. They have made a pitt, and digged it, and are fallen into the ditch that they have made.

1 Cor. 1. 20. Where is the Wise? Where is the Scribe? Where is the Disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolishnesse the wisedome of this world?

The Reverend Authour desires such as have received offence at the 6, 7, and 8. Pages in his Ordinance for TYTHES Dismounted, to repaire for satisfaction to the last Clause hereof.

EUROPE, Printed by Martin Claw-Clergy, Printer to the Reverend Assembly of Divines, and are to be sold by Bartholmew Bang-Priest, at his shop in Toleration-street, at the signe of the Subjects Liberty, right opposite to Persecution-Court. 1646.

Estimated date of publication

24 January, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 416; Thomason E. 317. (15.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

To Our Reverend, Learned and Religious Brethren, the Prolocutour and the rest of the Assembly of Divines, now sitting in holy Conspiracy at King &illegible; the Seventh’s Chappell, at Westminster, &illegible; by fowl to the Two Houses of Parliament; These present.

REverend and Beloved BRETHREN, (for so I have Authority from your own secred President.) I cannot but take notice of your &illegible; vigilancy, and &illegible; endesvor: after this endlesse worke of Uniformity; that rather then you will loose the vantage of an opportunity, out of your &illegible; Providence, you can even create Opportunity it self, and then like the Godly, able, Orthodox of the Land indeed, most Prudently, in all Presbyterian Pitty, lay hold on the advantage, to consuming your endeavoured Uniformity: for after your so many spirituall, mysticall Conspiracies, the miraculous result of your must Seraphicke late Consultations for its present settlement, both &illegible; my Piety into an holy Admiration, that now I confesse your Policy high surpass’d my Sanctity; for upon the first of January, where the Injunctions &illegible; Generall Assembly in Scotland came into your grave and Learned Assembly against Toleration of Independency in this Kingdom & that read in your Reverend Audience, you had so ordered Superior. &illegible; that even in then very instant of time, (fast as if it had been &illegible;) this Most juditious argumentative Letter of the London Ministers, (from that Syon-Colledge-conspiracy,) should present it self; whereas the Learned Mr. Hinderson, forthwith in a Scotch Rapture, cryed out of the great Providence of GOD, saying, Doubtlesse no other but God was the Father of Two such Blessed Twins! that at one instant of time, so many godly, Learned and Orthodox of the 2. Kingdoms, should so happily concurre and meet with their desires, and advice for this generall Uniformity: Indeed is war a Providence neatly and plausibly &illegible; and doubtlesse would have done the deed, but that there is one thing that spoiles all, The Lord &illegible; the Tokens of Lyars, and maketh Diviners and,Jsai. 44. 25. &illegible; wise men backwards, and maketh their knowledge foolishnesse: But bire’s not all: The Assembly’s Anathama against Toleration, at that instant of time, it given into the HOUSE. O, there’s a Divine Providence indeed! Sure, our Syon Colledge is even Presbyterializ’d into the &illegible; Mobile, or else that supercelestiall Assembly at Westminster is REFORMD into the Emperiall Heaven, that &illegible; &illegible; Providence it self is thus in their dispose; an exaltation even into the Throne of God: Where are our Presbyters &illegible; They even are set as girls in the Temple of God, shewing themselves that they are gods indeed, by the working of Sathan, with all power, and &illegible; and lying wonders: Providence after Providence, &c. to deceive: All which I have &illegible; discovered, and in all Dedicatory humility represent unto your venerable &illegible; those my Observations upon this Letter; that happily you may take notice therein of a &illegible; Providence of God indeed, that such Godly, Learned, Orthodox Divines, &illegible; the Ministers of the City of London, should be so &illegible; in their wisedome, that their reasons against Toleration should inevitably conclude Toleration, condemne themselves, and their Presbytry, which I have endeavoured to evidence to the whole world, and leave it to the publike Tryall, either to stand or to fall by such their Reasoning, and against this &illegible; proffer, to have our &illegible; tryed by their own touch-stone, the Presbyters themselves cannot except: If I &illegible; then let me &illegible; your Churches &illegible; which themselves are pleased to put upon it, a Coat of divers Colours, pag. 1. Thus then for the prizse.

LONDON MINISTERS.

When all &illegible; are examined by the Word, then that which is best may be held fast.

Martin. This plainly grants an equity to the holding fast, or practising that with all freedome, which every man in his own understanding, by such examination shall so discover; or otherwise, Wherefore shall any have liberty of Examination after their understandings, seeing otherwise they cannot examine, if after their understandings, they may not practise, for what is written, is written for our learning, and consequently for our Practise; So that your Monopolizing all Liberty and Judgement into your own hands, is condemned by the equity of your owne Argument; If you will be sole Judges, you may besole Examiners too, for after wee have examined, if your judgement &illegible; us the practise, wee are never the neere, for Faith without Workes &illegible; dead. Wee may be sure, what ever our Examination &illegible; which entrencheth upon your Lordliness over your Brethren, &illegible; Pompe and Preheminence, your Ordinance for Tythes, your Congregationall, Classicall, Provinciall, Nationall Courts, &c. to expect determination concerning the same, to be of like effect, with that of the Lord Bishops, when it was put to Vote in the Lords &illegible; whether the Bishops had a Right by Law to Vote therein; Or like into your Answer given by your Committee, to Mr. Tomber 12. Arguments against Infant, Baptisme specifyed in his &illegible; pag. 2. Or rather more like unto the Answer which &illegible; the High-Priest gave unto Paul, when he had declared, that he had lived in all good Conscience unto that day: &illegible; him on the mouth, (Acts 23. 1, 2.) with the Presbyterian clutter-fist of iniquity.

Lond. &illegible; The &illegible; and endeavours of the Independents Toleration, at this time extreamly it unseasonable and &illegible; &illegible; 1. The Reformation of Religion is not yet &illegible; and setled among us, according to our Covenant: And why may not the Reformation be raised up at last to such purity and perfection, that truly tender Consciences may receive abundant Satisfaction, for ought that yet appeares?

Martin. But what Reformation is that, according to the Covenant, that you intend, till which our endeavours are extreamly unseasonable and &illegible; Sure wee must accept it in your owne Presbyterian sense, and what that is, is evident to the whole world, by your Pollitick endeavours, both private and publick, to be no other, but an absolute enslaving both of Parliament and People unto your Presbyterian Dictates in all matters Evangelicall and Spirituall; which is no other, but the very Spirit, Marrow, root, and Quinticense of Popery, against which, that very Covenant, in its genuine intent, expresly doth engage us and our Posterity in the fundamentall Extirpation thereof out of the Three Kingdomes; for indeed that preheminence is no other but an absolute Arrogation of Popish Supremacy, and spirit of Infallability, for plurallity of Persons in that arrogation, doth not alter the nature and essence of the thing arrogated, it is as well Popish Supremacy in a Synod, Classis, or the like, as in one man.

So that our Covenant doth engage us in the totall Extirpation of LORD PRESBYTERS, their Classes, Ordinances, &c. as well as of their Grandfather the Pope, their Fathers the Lord &illegible; their Courts, &illegible; &c. before them: Well, &illegible; it seems till this Popish &illegible; Prerogative (the &illegible; of your &illegible; after your sense of the Covenant) be absolutely &illegible; you judge it unseasonable and &illegible; Truly, (&illegible; end and beloved &illegible;) I submit unto your judgements herein, for to &illegible; is in the End, to crush the &illegible; in the shell, to prevent this approaching Papall &illegible; Tyranny and &illegible; of our Birthrights by the Independents Indeavours for a timely Toleration, before it be absolutely Presbyterian, will utterly annihilate and frustrate your designe, so that in your sense, it must needs be extreamly unseasonable indeed, when our mouthes are sowed up, our hands tyed behind us, our feet-fettered, then in your Presbyterian sense, comes in Our Season; &illegible; if before it he unseasonable and preproperous, that implyes, that then it will be seasonable; when the &illegible; is &illegible; you will give us leave to &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; Indeed we are obliged to &illegible; &illegible; Sanctities in the &illegible; degree, that you will be but pleased to &illegible; &illegible; mouth with a &illegible; Before, it is too soon, and after, it will be too late: And thus the truly tender Consciences may receive abundant satisfaction for ought that yet appeares, have their Persons banish’d or imprisoned, their goods Plundered and confiscate, their houses pull’d downe, and &illegible; made of the Timber to hang their tender Consciences out, to take the Presbyterian Ayre; soe no better as yet appeareth, and this is already evident both in their Writings and Sermons: (See &illegible; Sermon before the House, latter and of his Book.) And if they thus shew their teeth before they have full power to bite what will they doe, when their power is absolute; their &illegible; will be &illegible; if the future may be indged by the present, as all the &illegible; of the Wicked &illegible; Prov. 12. 10. And then wee shall be same (they having all Judgement in their hands) none shall be judged to be of truly &illegible; Consciences, but such as are Presbyteriall, such as will be awed ly their Power and Tyranny, the rest must stand upon their &illegible; Well, wee must stay till Reformation, according to the Covenant, be &illegible; setled, and what your sense is, is evident; but what Reformation is that the Covenant it self doth intend? Is it not a Reformation (after the &illegible; Letter of it) according to the Word of God? As for your Presbytery, though by your selves, in your late Petition for it’s establishment, &illegible; and &illegible; it to be the Ordinance of Jesus Christ, yet in the Judgement of the Parliament, it was Voted false and scandalous, and the highest title they ever voted upon it, was &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; therefore, not jure Divine: and it not jure Divine, then our Covenant which doth engage &illegible; in a Reformation, according to the Word of God, which is such an one, as is absolutely jure Divine, doth not engage &illegible; at all &illegible; Presbytrie, which by the Parliaments &illegible; confession, &illegible; but jure divine but rather to be &illegible; and the Parliament themselves, if they will but practise according to their owne Votes, cannot &illegible; us thereto by &illegible; of our Covenant, but are to Protect us and our Posterity from it; not suffering Presbytery no more then Papistry and &illegible; which are but jure &illegible; to insult and &illegible; over us, our Conscience, Persons or Estates; for if by our Covenant they be bound to safe-guard Us from the &illegible; of Papistry and &illegible; (the Two first divisions of the great City Babylon,) because they are but jure &illegible; then they are equally thereby bound to Protect us from the Tyranny and Oppression of Presbyters, (the third Division,) for themselves say, it is but jure &illegible; And yet, forsooth, you challenge the Precedency, your &illegible; be served first, as though you were the Children, and the Independents the &illegible; The Independents might rather &illegible; that the endeavours of the Presbyters are &illegible; and &illegible; till Independency be setled; for the Parliament never yet Voted Independency to be jure &illegible; neither are your selves able to prove it so to be.

Lon. Min. 2. It is not yet &illegible; what the Government of the Independents is, &illegible; would they ever &illegible; to let the world know what they &illegible; in that point, &c.

Martin. If it be unseasonable (according to your reasoning,) for such Independents, whose Government is not made known to the World; (for that is the reason of your Argument, for you state the unseasonablenesse in the non-knowledge, &c.) then for such whose Government is made knowne, must needs be seasonable, after the same reasoning.

But Reverend MARTIN, with his Brethren, where you dignify and &illegible; by the names of &illegible; &illegible; &c. have declared their Discipline to the whole World, &illegible; by their Preachings, Writings, and &illegible; practise, even unto this day: See the Confession of the 7. Churches. See Mr. Turners model, &illegible; An &illegible; &illegible; for &illegible; &illegible; Therefore the endeavours of Reverend MARTIN, and his Independent Brethren, must now be seasonable, ever from your own reasoning.

But I must needs tell you by the way, you need not much urge the only seasonablenes of yours from the knowledge thereof: I pray you, what is it? can you tell your selves? You tell the Independents of their reserves, but what may they say of yours? for wee have yours but in part, and that neither presented, but by Peece-meals; now a little, and then a little, and still reserves in the rear, yea innumerable, still, for any thing we can perceive, which are but yet hammaring out to the temper of the People; what they are, is best known to your selves: what is knowne, is not so beautifull, as to make all others unseasonable and præpreperous: If drawn into a Modell, I think it will rather affright then allure; for in the Bulke, it is no other then a Bundle of Tyrannicall Ordinances, and wicked Lawes over our Consciences, Persons, and Estates, to corment us in endlesse Suits and Appeales from Court unto Court, Congregationall, Classicall, Provinciall, Nationall, &c. with mercilesse Mulcts and Penalties upon our Persons, as your Thundering Ordinance for the Covenant, your Plundering Ordinance for Tythes, your Monopolizing Ordinance for Preaching, your Romish Episcopall Ordinance for Ordaining of Ministers, your devouring Ordinance for the better establishment of your Directory, your High-Commission, Star-chamber Ordinance for the Lords Supper, &c. witnesse to the whole World: and truly, whether this Presbyterian Modell of your Government be so honourable, to make all others unseasonable, I leave to the woefull experience of those against whom this Modell of Ordinances is in force, yea, even to the whole World, to judge.

But not to detract from the integrity of those Independents, you here intend, it is evident, that hitherto the Assembly have suppress’d the bringing in of their Modell, that they (by all their unwearied endeavous, could never attain an equall and just liberty thereunto, either by dispute or otherwise, as the copy of their Remonstrance touching that businesse doth declare. Now let the World judge, whether this be fair and reasonable dealing, such as becomes the Ministers of the City of London. First to suppresse the delivery, and then like Scholast Synodicall Disputants, to urge the non-delivery, as an Argument against their Toleration. ’Tis a slout Argument, if but followed; If it be in force to any, it is to the suppressors not the suppressed.

Lon. Min. Secondly, their desires and endeavours are unreasonable, and unequall its divers regards. 1. Because no such Toleration hath been established (so farre as we know,) in any Christian state, by the Civill Magestrate.

Martin. It seems Holland, Poland, Transilvania, &c. where free Toleration of all sorts of Independents is established by Civill Magestrates, are not Christian States, because they are not wholly Presbyterializ’d, Tolerating none but Presbyterian: So that in your sense, they are no further Christian then they are Presbyterian: So that if this Parliament should tollerate any other but your selves, it seems you make account to Unchristen them all, your Bull is prepared against them, you have told them what they must expect, the censure of Infidells, Heathens and Hereticks, an Excommunication ipso facto, for they must not be Christian. But in case there were no such Toleration in any State professing Christianity, yet that were no Argument against Toleration, for Evangelicall Precept is not derivative from Humane President: The practise of Emperours, Kings, States or the like, is no Evangelicall Rule; for Evangelicall Right, must have Evangelicall Authority, which one would have thought had been known to Evangelicall Ministers, such as you stile your selves.

Lon. Min. 2. Because some of them have solemnely profess, that they cannot suffer Presbytry, and answerable hereto is their practise in those places where Independency prevailes; Therefore their Toleration is unreasonable and unequall.

Martin. If their Toleration be unreasonable and unequall, because some of them solemnly professe, (which I scarse beleeve,) that they cannot suffer Presbytry; then by the same reason, the Toleration of Presbytry is much more unreasonable, and unequall, because all of them doe solemnly professe, that they cannot, neither will they suffer Independency; though Independents could suffer them, would but the Parliament, according to their own Covenant and Lawes, knock off their Horns, pluck out their Tusks, break their Jaws, pare their Nailes, that they neither Push, goar, trush, bite, scratch or devour any more: for if it be in force to all, for that denyall by some, it is much more forceable to all, where all deny: So that, if the denyall of Toleration be a sufficient Argument, (as it seems according to the Reason of the Lon. Min.) against the Toleration of such denyers, then what must become of the Presbyters? The same pit that they have digged for others, they must be consent to fall into it themselves.

Lon. Min. Many mischieses will inevitably follow upon this Toleration, and that both upon Church and Common-wealth. First to the Church.

Bitten heart-burnings among Brethren, will be fomented and perpetuated to Posterity.

Mar. The reason of this Argument in this; That which will occasion heart-burnings, foment and perpetuate them to posterity, is not to be tollerated in a Common-wealth. Therefore, if I prove an Universall Tolleration will be an occasion of allaying of heart-burnings to posterity, Persecution the contrary, then by the Argument of the Lon. Min. such Tolleration is lawfull, and that which they so ignorantly prosecute, unlawfull.

That which occasioneth murmurings, repinings, fears, jealousies, conspiracies, insurrections, rebellions, &c. begetteth heart-burnings, and perpetuates them to Posterity; and so by your Argument, not to be Tollerated: And on the contrary, That which doth not beget murmurings, &c. doth not beget heart-burnings, or perpetuate them to Posterity, but tendeth to alloy them, and prevent them, and so by your own reasoning to be tollerated.

But Persecution, or Non-Tolleration which you plead for, occasioneth and begetteth murmurings, repinings. &c. for it enrageth the Conscience, then which, nothing is more neare and dear unto us, and a wounded Conscience, (saith Solomon,) who is able to bear it? Wee had rather loose our lives then deny our Faith; and what will not men doe for their lives? this suggesteth and provoketh to Conspiracies, Jnsucrections, Rebellions, &c. as Holland, France, Germany, Jreland, Scotland and England &c. have felt by woefull experience: Nothing is more desperate and resolute, then an enraged Conscience, it is of a Lyon-like nature in its fury, it beareth on a man, even to the shedding and laying down of his life; no dangers, no attempts, though never so difficult, never so desperate, can beare it down; it will venture, though it perish, and on the contrary, (to usemine own words in the Arraignment, pag. 12.) it is a Lambe, if appeased, and nothing more mild, more gentle and loving then it. Enraged, it is like the wild bure out of the Forrest; pleased, it is like the Dove from the Arke; no greater friend, no greater foe; Oppression (saith the Wise man) will make a wise man mad; a very worme will turne again, if troad upon; It may beget wrath, but never can beget Love, and that which doth so, must needs beget heart-heart-burnings and perpetuate them to posterity; Therefore by your owne grant, not to be Tollerated: Thus the Fowlers are caught in their owne snare.

Lond. Min. The life and power of godlinesse, will be eaten out by frivilous Disputes, and vaine janglings.

Mart. The Reason of this Argument, is this, That which cateth out the life and power of godlinesse, in the judgement of the Lon. Min. is not to be tollerated. Whence I Reason.

That which preventeth the breaking and spreading forth of Knowledge in the Word of God, esteth up the life and power of godliness.

But Non-tolleratition, your silensing all Disputes, tryall of Doctrines, and confining unto all your Dictates, preventeth & suppresseth the breaking forth, encrease and growth of knowledge; for by faire and equall Reasonings, and tryall of Doctrine, light would daily break forth and encrease; as common experience doth witnesse.

How could you have been converted to Presbytry? How could the Rottenness of Popery, Episcopacy, &c. have been discovered, and spread through the Kingdome, had it not been for Preachings, Writings, Disputations, tryall of Doctrine, &c.

Therefore your Non-Tolleration, and suppressing of all Disputes, &c. cateth up the life and Power of Godlinesse; and therefore not to be setled.

Thus farre the London-Ministers and MARTIN are agreed: Surely their Letter is a close couched Presbyterian Designe of comming over to Independency; He promise you, this is a faire step at the first, and pretty cunningly carried: we gratulate our so happy concurrence; Sirs, You are all heartily welcome to our Sanctuary in TOLERATION-STREET, and we acknowledge our selves deeply engaged to the London Ministers, for their good service to our cause: Be therefore encouraged, Reverend & beloved Brethren, goe on and prosper, wee are not offended at your Policy, to Reason thus covertly for us; wee well know, that Rome was not built in a day.

But let us proceed, and see what further Assistance your Reasons affords.

Lond. Min. The whole course of Religion in private Families will be incorupted and undermined.

The Reason of which Argument is this.

Martin. That which interrupteth and undermineth the course of Religion, in private Families, is not to be setled.

The edge of which Reason, I thus turne against you.

That which tendeth to the making of Hypocrites, Fearers, and pleasers of men more then of God, must needs interrupt and undermine the purity of Religion in private Families.

But the coercive Power, which you so plead for, doth so, for &illegible; &illegible; multitudes, (as common experience doth too much &illegible;) for fear of bodily punishment, deprivation of their goods, losse of their Places, Trading, &c. to dissemble with their Consciences, even practise contrary thereto, and temporise with the Time, which is an absolute perversion of the power of Godliness in them Therefore.

Lon. Min. Reciprocall duties between Persons of neerest and &illegible; relation, will be extreamly violated.

Mar. The reason hereof is, That which is destructive to reciprocall duties, is to be abominated; the which I thus retort upon your owne heads. That which setteth Father against &illegible; sonne against Father, &illegible; freiad against another, King against Parliament, Parliament against King, Kingdom against Kingdome, and divideth Nations and People amongst themselves, and enrageth them one against another, extreamly violated. Reciprocall Duties betweene Persons of neerest and dearest relation.

But so doth Persecution; For where this principle it, of foreing the contrary-minded, will they, will they, it engendereth and begetteth feares and jealousies one of another; and when one knoweth the other is his mortall enemy, it maketh each other to stand in defyance and defence one against the other, even to the drawing of the sword, especially when one thinks he can conquer the other, which makes them lie in wait for blood, witnesse our Armies of this Kingdome; and hereupon they wallow in one anothers blood: Yea, what will not the oppressed doe against the oppressour; Tyranny is the another of Conspiracies, &illegible; Repinings, &c, which at length break forth (after they have gotten strength,) into open Rebellions, Insurrections, &c. Therefore Non-Toleration extreamly violateth reciprocall dueties between Persons of nearest and dearest Relation.

Lon. Min. 9. 10. All &illegible; Sects &c. (See the Letter.)

Mar. The marrow of these two is this, That Independency is not to be Tolerated, because other Sects and Heresies, under that notion, will seek to be tollerated: But in case they should not, them by the vertue of your Argument, it should be tollerated: So that, by your own grant, its Toleration is only accidentally unequall; not absolutely in respect of it self; but casually in respect of others. Therefore, why are you so &illegible; against the equity of its Toleration, seeing from your own Argument, it is equall. If it be good to tolerate that, and evill to tolerate &illegible; &c. you must not forbeare the good, to avoid the evill, doe evill, that good may come of it, but must doe the thing that is just and equall in it self; that is, tolerate the Independents, whom you title Brethren, godly and learned, and doe to them, as you say of them, what ever becomes of us; wee neither expect nor crave your mercy: If we cannot have Justice on earth, wee appeal unto the God of heaven, and meekly and freely submit, to suffer for his Name, with our hearts rejoycing, that wee can be counted worthy so to doe.

L. Min. Secondly, (mischiefs) to the Common-wealth; for thereby the Kingdome will be weakned by Scandalls and Divisions, &c.

Mart. The reason of this Argument is, That which tendeth not to keep all in Peace and Civill Society, but reduceth them to Divisions and scandals, that is not to be established by your thus reasoning: But Non-toleration keepeth not all, but one predominant Sect in Unity, dividing all others from it; persecuting, reviling, upbraiding, and reproaching them, though never so honest, godly, conscienscious, sober, meek, and neighbourly, with lyes, scandalls, nick-names, as Anabaptists, Brownists, &illegible; Hereticks, &illegible; new wandering Blazing-Starres & Firebrands, pernitious matiners, &illegible; Generation, schismaticall, Anti-Parliamentary, &illegible; &illegible; daring, presumptuous, &illegible; libellous, scandalous, seditious, insolent, blaspheraous, seditious Trampetiers, revilers of God, despisers of Government, resisters of Higher power, stirrers up of Sedition and insurrection, Anabaptisticall Sectaries, New furious Sectaries, &illegible; conspiratours, &illegible; of Parl. Anti-covenanters, audatious, contemptuous Libellers, New furious Ringleaders of Sedition, House-creepers, Incendiaries, Royling Rabshakeh’s publick &illegible; Affronters of Parl.*blasphemers against the Assembly of Diviner, &. which are no other then termes of provocation and wrath of vengeance and ignomy, tending to the breach of the generall &illegible; of Unity, Peace, and Civill Society, which must needs extreamly weaken the Kingdom, for the Kingdome lies in the Unity of the People. Therefore your Non-Toleration ought in no wise to be established.

L. Min. It is much to be doubted, least the power of the Magestrate, &c. See Letter.

Martin. The reason hereof is, Those that are Anti-Magesteriall, or weaken the Magesteriall Power, are not to be tollerated: But your intended Prelaticall Presbytry is Anti-Magisteriall: &illegible; you have brought your Hogges to a faire market, held in Toleration-street at the signe of the Subjects Liberty, &c.

Minor proved.

Those that would not have all coercive Power in the Magestrates, hands, are Anti-Magesteriall, and weakners of the Magestrates Power.

But Presbytry would not have all coercive Power onely in the hands of the Magestracy, but laboureth to encroach, as much as possibly it can into its own hands, as continued practise doth evidence. Therefore, by the London Ministers own reasoning, Presbytry is Anti-Magesteriall, and not to be setled.

On the contrary. Those that would have all Civill Power, preserved intire in its own proper Magesteriall compasse, are not in the least Anti-Magisteriall.

But Reverend MARTIN, with his Independent Brethren, would have it intirely preserved in its own Magesteriall compasse; they would not have it wrested or perverted to this or that Sect, to this or that Religion, but would have it, yet, expose their lives to have it preserved precisely in its own property.

Therefore, Reverend MARTIN, and his Brethren are not Anti-Magesteriall: But in all faithfulnesse, acknowledge themselves not onely ly bound to pray for all in lawfull Authority, but even to spend their Lives and Estates in their Just Defence, against all opposition, encroachment and usurpation thereof, whatsoever: And to this our practise, hath given Witnesse, even when Magestracy was in greatest danger of subvertion; for when the Parliament had no other helpe under God, then we stuck closest to them; even, when the King came in a Hostile manner for the 6. MEMBERS in the House; while the degenerate Temporizing Presbyters, stood as farre off, as from Scotland to Westminster; and have continued unspotted in our Fidelity to them, even unto this very day.

And this I dare be bold to affirme, That if the King should conquer and confound the Parliament, the now Parliamentized-Presbyters, even the Clergy in generall, would therewith be Royalized, rather then loose their severall Parsonages, and that which is now Antichristian, Episcopacy, would then be as Christian as ever it was in their esteemes; for they’l tell you, That they must submit unto the Higher Powers, and the Powers that are, are of God; and that cures all.

If you doe but consider, they have even reserv’d an help at a dead lift, they tell us now, That a Bishop and a Presbyter is all one, and thereupon retaine their old Ordination, derived from a forraign Power, and so goe forth, and ordaine other young Bishops; So that if the King should subdue us, they are still in their Episcopall Ministry, and a little Royall Reformation would continue their places. Then they would take Covenants, Preach and pray against the Parliament, as much as ever they did against the King: Thus, rather then they would be confounded themselves, they would let true Magesteriall Parliamentary Government goe to confusion; and in that Day of Tryall, scarce any would be found to witnesse against Him, except the now despised handfull of Separates.

And yet wee must be cast out of the Parliaments Protection, by this Temporizing Faction of Presbyters: Ingratefull Inhumanity! Heare O &illegible; and judge O Earth!

BUt whereas his Holiness, out of a late spirituall Rapture, at that Inquisition Ordinance of the Supper, hath in the 6, 7. and 8. pages of the Ord. for Tythes Dismounted, even spurn’d at Synodean prodigy in the Highest Orbe; whereupon through the weaknesse of some, and malice of others, I am misconstructed to be Anti-Parliamentory: I would have such, the Two Honourable Houses of Parliament, and the whole World know, That there was not, nor is to this day, the least thought, or intent in my heart against Magesteriall Government, either therein, or in any thing else that I have written; And of this I take God to Record, as I shall answer it at the great and Dreadfull Day of Judgement, when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed; Onely respecting Presbyterian deprivation, or corruption too much diffused (to my hearts grief) into the Two Houses, by the bewitching subtilty, and over-powering Policy of that prevalent, deceitfull, Synodean Faction; and so my writing there, is not against that High and Honourable Court, or any thing in their Magesteriall capacity, but simply against the Presbyterian Exorbitancy, in the Names of the LORDS and COMMONS stretched beyond the limits and Precincts of their Magesteriall Function. As for the Congregational, Classicall, Provinciall, Nationall Courts and grievances, there mentioned, I was forced, in Equity and Iustice, to use them in their Names, in whose they were owned and published, else how could I have discharged my Duty in the reproofe of the one, or discovery of the other; so than my virulency and bitterings there, is onely against Presbyterian Competitors, and &illegible; into the Office and Royalty of my most Soveraigne Lord, the King of Kings, CHRIST JESUS; against all tyrannicall encroachers, and usurpers of our Birth-rights, Liberties, and freedoms in Persons and Estates, under what pretence, notion or Title soever.

So that in plain English, the proper morrall and genuine intent of those 3. pages, is a meer contestation and defyance of your Presbyterian Tyranny, whether in the name of the two Houses, or otherwise gloss’d or presented; labouring thereby only to brush off the superiour Title of the Two Houses from it, that it might be cleerly discovered in its proper ugly Presbyterian shape, unto the Kingdome; only to pluck off its Parliamentary cloak, that we might the better discerne that Synodean, Presbyteran Monster. That the People, under that specious Magisteriall vizor, may not entertaine that deadly venomous Presbyterian Serpent into their bosomes, and be destroyed unawares.

Thus I am resolved to oppose Tyranny it selfe, where ever I find it, mangre the malice of Devills, and terrour of the mighty Rulers of this Earth, yea, even of the sturdy Presbyters themselves; though I, and all that’s mine perish, Ile doe it: were there a Parliament of no lesse then Emperours, Kings and Princes competitours with it, I would spare them in my just testimony against it, no more then I would so many beggers upon a dunghill, for I have not the truth of my GOD, nor the love of my Country in respect of Persons.

And this my contestation and defyance of Presbytry, is no otherwise against it, but onely as it is Exorbitant, Tyrannicall, Prelatticall, Cruell and Ambitions; as for honest, meek, Evangelicall Presbytry, I am ready, through the Power of my God, to seal it with my blood, even &illegible; of an unfained love thereunto. So that in brief, my enmity is onely against Tyranny, where ever I find it, whether in Emperour, King, Prince, Parliament, Presbyters, or People.

Thus Reader, thou hast my own proper sense, as being best expounder of my own words, for no man knoweth the heart of man, but himself: All other I utterly disclaime, and onely own that fore-mentioned Sense, and thereto subscribe.

MARTIN MAR-PRIEST.

DOUBT.

Who hath &illegible; the Coat of Divers Colours, MARTIN, or &illegible; London-Ministers?

FINIS.

Endnotes

 [* ] See Prynt Fresh Discovery. pag. 17. Contents of the 4. Sect.

 


8.27. Thomas Johnson, A Plea for Free-Mens Liberties (26 January, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Thomas Johnson, A Plea for Free-Mens liberties: or The monopoly of the Eastland marchants anatomized by divers arguments (wch will also serve to set forth the unjustnesse of the marchant-adventurers monopoly,) and proved illegall, unnaturall, irrationall, against the honour of the nation, tending to its ruine and vassalage, procured by evill counsellors: and lastly treasonable: with a short comment upon their oath, worthy of every mans serious perusall. Penned for the publique good, by Thomas Johnson marchant.

Estimated date of publication

26 January, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 417; Thomason E. 319. (1.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Prologue to all the Commons of England.

VVOrthy Freemen of England, the former publique Magistrates of this Kingdom, by their Machivilian empoysoned principles, and specious pretentes of common good, whereas nothing lesse was intended, have most cunningly and frandently cozened you of your native freedoms, to which by the fundamentall lawes and constitutions of the Kingdom, yee were born unto, & secretly by wicked patents have stolne away your Birth-right, to set up the particular and self interests of private societies: One of which I here present to your serious consideration, as a great grievance and burthen under which the honest Clothier especially, and thousands of poore people groane: yee know for what this Kingdom hath almost been wasted to asbes, yee have spent so much of your estates and blood, viz. the subjects liberty, to which all civil government is subservient. My advice to all is this, especially that clothiers and others, who are deeply interessed, that as they love their blooding dying Country, their deliverance from so great a thraldome, they would by patitioning, and all lawfull &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; with the Parliament, for the removall of this and all other pressures. They are bound in duty to God, in justice to you, in discharg all of so great a trust committed into their hands, to ease you of all unjust grievances, intolerable burthens, be therefore active in the work. For very importunities sake, your indeavours will be crowned with a happy successes and (if you &illegible; &illegible;) &illegible; the &illegible; of your &illegible; which shall &illegible; be the desire of &illegible; who is willing to &illegible; you.

Thomas Johnson.

WHosoever survayes this hand in her radiant and shining luster with community and freedom, cannot but say, a &illegible;! oh how great a change I for indeed, this Kingdom is a corporation or society of men under one form of civil government, made by common consene in Parliament, who are all bound by the law, to maintain common freedom, and the generall good of each other.

But particulars, Patent societies swelling with a Iuciserian spirit, in desiring to advance into a higher room then their fellows, did by setuptitlous Patents incorporate themselves, exclusively became destructive to the whole body, and subverters of the true ancient priviledges of the people, and of all societies, those of Marchants are the worst, having no foundation on the lawes; The fellowship and charter of those that stile themselves Marchants of East-land, is a monopoly of this kind, according to the true genuine sence of the word monopoly, relating to a private company, who ascribe unto themselves the sole exercise and benefit of such a trade, wherein every subject hath equall freedome with them, all which this monopoly doth, and is illegal, being contrary to magna Charta, the petition of right, Statutes of monopolies, with divers others, and in particular these 3. following: 1. is of the 14. of Edw. 3. 2. Jrem, Where it is contained in the great Charter, that all Marchants shall have safe and sure conduct to go out of the Realm of England, and to come, and abide, and go through the Realme of England of well by water as by land: we at the request of the Prelates, Earles, Barons, and Commons, will and grant for us, and for our heirs and successors, that all Marchants, Denizens, and Foraigners (except those which be of our enmity) may without let, safely come into the said Realme of England, with their goods and Marchandize, and safely tarry and safely return, paying the customs, subsidies, and other profits reasonably thereof due, so alwaies, that franchise and free customes reasonably, granted by us and our ancestors to the City of London, and other cities and good Towers of our Realm of England, be to them saved. The 2. is of &illegible; Ed. 3. 3. That the ordinance made before this time upon taking of sorts of wools in every County, be wholy nulled and defeated, and that every man, as well stranger as privy from henceforth may buy wool, according as they may agree with the seller, as they were wont to do, before the said ordinances, and that the sea be open to all manner of marchants, to passe with their marchandize where it &illegible; please them. By both these statutes it evidently appeareth, that every Englishman may transport his commodity without molestation, to what port beyond sea he pleaseth, and make sale for his best advantage, every Englishman being a native denizen and privyman of this kingdom, according to the true meaning of the law for it is imaginable to me, that the law should provide better for aliens, then her own children, the 3. is of 12. H. 7. 4. viz. as followeth To the discreet Commons in this present Parl. sheweth unto your discreet wisdoms, the Marchant Adventurers inhabiting and dwelling in divers ports of this Realm out of the City of London, that where they have their passage, resort, course and recourse with their goods, wares, and marchandize in divers &illegible; and parts beyond the sea, aswel into Spain, Portugal, Britan, Ireland, Normandy, France, &illegible; Venice, &illegible; Eastland, Freezeland, and other divers and many places, regions and countries being in league and &illegible; with the King our soveraign Lord, there to buy and sell, and make their exchanges with the said goods, wares, and marchandizes, according to the law and custom used in every of the said regions and places, and there every person freely to use himself to his most advantage, without exaction, fine, imposition, or contribution to be had or taken of them, to, for, or by any English person or persons. &c. By which Statute, all marchants, aswell those inhabiting in divers parts of the Kingdome, as of the City of London, as also every free born subject, is acknowledged as his right to have freedom to trade to the said parts mentioned and to divers other regions and countries without subjection of any patent or paying any exaction, fine, &c. for in that the &illegible; saith, every person freely to use himself to his most advantage, without exaction, &c. to be had or taken of them, or any of them, to, for, or by any English person, or persons, it clearly holds &illegible; that the marchant, and consequently every man that useth comerce in these parts, ought not to come under the obedience of any oppressing corporation whatsoever: now Donst and the East-land being expressed in the slainte, which are the principall parts to which these East land marchants are priviledged by their monopoly, and indeed the crown and glory of the rest for venting our native commodities, as also the other included, when the &illegible; saith and other divers and many places, regient, and countries, I hope every honest man willbe willing with heart and hand to endevour the recovery of our birthright which the law so evidently makes our owne from these unjust oppressors.

2. Contrary to the light of nature, which teacheth men to walk by congruity and equality, not to oppresse, because they would not be oppressed, not to take away any mans right, because they would not have another use the same, measure to them. Which principles of nature are engraven upon the nature of heathens, who certainly will rise up in judgement one day against these men that sell us for slaves in our own land.

3. It is irrationall, reason being the fountain of all honest laws, gives to every man propriety and liberty: propriety of interest, freedom of enjoyment and improovement to his own advantage, from that propriety take away freedom, & a considerable part is gone nay we see it by expenence, that those who have berest us of our liberty, have made hold with our propriety, and indeed if prerogative may take away the one, why not the other from the same principles? so that it appears to be rationall, that every native who hath propriety of goods, wares, and marchandize, hath freedom to transport them to any part beyond Seat, and there convert them, to his own profit, it being his true and proper inheritance so to do, it is very strange to my understanding, that one man should do the work, and another man receive the wages I mean, that the honest clothier who has toyled much in the making of his cloth shall not have the benefit to sell it here for his own gain to ship it for more profit, but being debarred of freedom in both, must make sale to them, in whose power it into give him what price they please, whereby he is cheated of the fruit of his labour.

4. That the monopoly is against the honour of the Nation, because by it the people are put in a condition of vassalage in their own country, it takes away industry the spring of wealth, the hearts of the people being brought to servility and not able by reason of this, and other the like patents to imploy themselves, cannot chuse but procure sad effects if not timely prevented, for.

5. The patent was illegally procured by the solicitation of evil Counsellors, under the broad seal of England, in the 25 year of the raigne of Queen Elizabeth, it being of no longer standing under spectous pretences, as the profit of her then Majesty, the good of the Kingdom, &c. whereas by it the natives have his weakned and spoiled, which will easily appear, if we consider these particulars.

1. By reason of this Patent, thousands of poor people are in a condition of beggery, who otherwise might maintain themselves in honest callings, by the making of cloath, and other woollen manufactures, by carding, spinning, wearing, &c. and certainly this one thing throughly considered, should stirre up the bowels of every truly noble spirited Englishman, to double his strength, if it were possible, as hundred sold, in all just wayes, for the removall of so great an obstraction.

2. The poor Clothier suppressed, none being to made to these parts but the company, the clothier makes not half the cloathes he might: and for those he doth make they being of a confederacy, and having all the priviledge of buying in their own hands, by reason whereof, many times he is forced to sell them at a far less price then they cost him in making, or else to keep them till the next year, which discourages and slackens the clothier in the prosecution of his calling, and causeth some to fail, others to give over, and those which remain, many of them scarce can make a living.

3. This Monopoly greatly impareth the trade of cloth, those who are judicious affirm that 5000 cloths more then are, would be made, shipped, and expended yearly in those parts to which they are authorised to trade to, which I verify beleeve & prove thus, all the cloth they ship, some extraordinary times excepted, it but to 1. or 2. Towns, and there residing their Factors, who making sale to the Burger, he sendeth the cloth up and down the Country, from whence ariseth many mischiefs the Countries not being furnished as they should: as also the selling at such excessive rates, causeth the Datch to make cloth in an aboundant manner, & to be satisfied with it, though it be exceeding course and again, there being divers Kingdoms, Dominions, Dukedomes Countries, Cities, and Towns, to which by their patent they are licenced, what advantage would the young marchant have, having so vast a compasse, how active would he be from Town to Town, from City to City, from one Country to another, and selling cheap, would invite forraigne parties to set a true estimate upon our native commodities, and certainly were trade free, Sweedland, and Powerland, would vent much cloth, whereas the company is not able to satisfie the Eastland it self, by reason of the smalnesse of their stock, it may be easily conceived, that such a small Company of private men, are never able to suffice such famous Kingdoms and Dukedomes to which they onely are licenced to traffick.

6. It causeth a great decay of Navigation, which sustaineth the mariners, so that by this and other the like patents, the Saylorie greatly greatly supprest.

7. It obstructeth returnes, divers of the most stable commodities which our Country stands in, need of, are imported by them, viz. flax, hemr, pot-ashes, pitch, tarre, course linnen packing, canvas with divers other very considerable marchandize, now they bring over when they please, and what they please, and sell at what price they please, which cannot but have sundry evil concomitance. 1. Our Country is not satisfyed with that variety and conveniency it should: and 2. By reason the Citizen gives such an unreasonable rate to the marchant, the poor have all excessive dear, giving many times half as much more then the comodity is worth, or then it would be sold for were the trade but open, from which and such other dealings it in, that the people are unconscionably wasted, and weakned, and therefore what ere it cost us, lets have this ravenous patent down, whereby there would be all these gallant effects: multitudes of poor maintained the clothier raised, the trade of cloth greatly augmented by reason that thousands might be vented more, then are the number of merchants increased, the art of navigation furthered and lastly, an universal benefit to the whole nation, from the plenty of marchandize imported which we should have at far easier and more valuable considerations. Ob. But if trade be free, the Alien will expect freedom also. As I see no ground but aliens paying custom, provided alwaies that wee enjoy as full and large priviledges with them, they ought to have the like here with us but secondly suppose the State should prohibit strangers, yet there is no shadow or colour of right reason, that we who have equall liberties in the lawes have ventured our estates and lives so freely, to preserve them, should be deprived of our inheritance, and therefore for further satisfaction, I shall here insert part of their charter, that every one may judg whether it be just or no: Forasmuch as we be credibly informed &c. that you our Subjects marchants, and others, exercising and using the &illegible; and seat of marchandize, one and from any our Dominions through the sound into the Realmes, Kingdoms, Dominions, Dukedomes, Countries, Cities and Towns, of Norway, Swethia, Poland, and the territories of the same Kingdoms, as also into &illegible; and Liestand, under the dominion of the King of Pole, Prussia, and also Powerland, from the river of Odera Eastward, and also Ry and Revill in Liestand King Kingsbrough, Elbinge, Brownsbrough, and Dansick in Brusia, Copenhaven and Elsenore in Dansk: except the Nerve, and the territories thereof belonging at also into the sland of Finland, Goteland, Eweland, and Barutholme, within the Sound aforesaid, by one consent are willing to gather, congregate, and assemble your selves into one fellowship, and to be one body incorporate and politique, indeed, and in name; wee considering that your purposes in this behalf are very lausable, do therefore not onely approve and ratifie the same, but will you to persevere in your good minds and purposes, to the establishment and perfection thereof, and earnestly desiring that our marchants and their successors haunting the said Kingdomes, Dominions, Countries, Cities and Townes, before mentioned or any of them, for merchandize, in and through the Sound of the Kingdome of Denmark (except before excepted) may from henceforth profit and increase as prosperously as any marchants of this Land have aforetime increased and profited, & do grant for us, our heires and success us that from hence forth there be and shall be of the said Fellowship, one Governour, and one Deputy, or Deputies, and foure and twenty assistants of the land fellowship; and that they, or the major part of them, may make Statutes, Lawes, and ordinances: and that the aforesaid Governour, or Deputie, or Deputies, and their successors, or the major part of them, as is aforesaid then present, as often as need shall be; the said Statutes, Laws, and ordinances, shall and may execute and put unexecution aswell within our Realme of England, as within the said Realmes, Dominions, Cities, and Countries, and every of them: and for that divers persons, our subjects, being not brought up in marchandize through their ignorance and lack of knowledge, commit many inconventency, we willing to resist and prevent them, and intending to further the expert marchant in their lawfull and honest trade: will, and by our Regall Authority we Command, and also prohibite and forbid by these presents, that no subject of us, our heirs, or successors, which is not, nor shall bee by force of these presents made free of the said Felloship shall by any maner of meanes at any time hereafter inter meddle in the trade of Marchandize; or by any meanes buy and sell, or use any traffique into the said parts of Eastland, and Countries aforesaid, or any of them, (except before excepted,) upon pain to incur our indignation: as also to pay such fines, and amencements, and to suffer imprisonment, and such other paines due to the Transgresson of the said statutes, ordinances, and constitutions of the said Fellowship, or to the said Governour or his Deputy and assistance aforesaid, shall seeme meere and conveniene, any Law, Statute, Custome, or Ordinance, to the contrary thereof, many other things notwithstanding &c.

And do further by these presents inhibit and forbid, all and every our subjects, and the subjects of us our heires and successors, not being licenced and authorized by vertue of these presents, to traffique in and to the said Countries, Kingdoms, Towns and places before recited, or use any manner of trade in and to them, contrary to the tenor of these presents upon pain to incurre the displeasure of us, our heires and successors, and to be fined, payned, and imprisoned, according to the severall discretions and laws of the officers of the said former severall Companies and their successors, witnesse our self at Westminster, the 17. of August, in the 11. year of our Raigne.

I no sooner made a surveyal of this cruel engine, what intollerable breaches & inrodes it hath continually made upon us, but was call into a sudden admiration, that so free 2 people as England, should suffer themselves so violently to be ground to power, which I shall illustrate to be treasonable in the practisers of it by these position: 1. If to survender a Castle by the Captain of that Castle through fear and cowardize, and not from any compliance with the enemy be treason, as was adjudged in the Parliament 1. Rich. 2. then is this a treasonable patent, for besides the place, there is onely a losse of the adjacent parts, but by this patent our lawes, liberties, nay our very lives, in pursuance of both the former, are subjected to will and tyranny, he that walks in the exercise of freedom, according to law, it subject to their counter commands, and to be fined, payned, and imprisoned and to suffer such other punishments as to them shall seem meet and convenient.

If to kill a judg upon the bench be treason, because of malice, not to the person, but to the law, then is this a treasonable patent, here is not onely a malice to the law, but a most butcherly weapon killing and destroying of it, these 2. cannot dwell together, for the life of the patent, so far as it extends, is the death of the law, which stops its free course for the benefit of the people, and makes it meerly a dead letter, a carkas without a soul, a power being given to Mr. Governour and his companions, to make laws, statutes, and ordinances which power is more and far greater then belongs to the chief magistrate to give, or can legally or justly be exercised by any but the Parliament, and therefore not to be received by any person or persons whatsoever, and certainly those laws, and all that government derived from Queen Elizabeths broad seal commission are according to the lusts of these men, being extrajuditiall, in that they are above the sphære of the law. 2. Contrary to the law, if the endeavouring the subversion of the ancient fundamentall lawes and government of this Kingdom, and to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical government be treason, as was adjudged in the case of the Earle of Strafford, and in the case of Sir Robert Berkeley, by the first article of impeachment by the House of Commons, July 6. 1641, then is this a treasonable patent, for here is not onely an indevour, but an actuall surrender of both law and government, which have made England a free people, and what more ancient or fundamental, then those laws which gratify the Commons; and by which they injoy their very lives, here is an arbitrary government introduced, & put into the hands of those whom the subject doth not own to have any right of power and rule, and that in so high a nature as can be no lesse then monarchicall, for what can a monarchicall power be, but to make lawes, and to punish the transgressors according to those lawes, by coefiscation of goods, imprisonment, or taking away the life of the vassals, all which they may doe by their patent, and certainly this company of Marchants of East-land, who have practized arbitrarily for so long a time as they have done, against the liberties of the natives deserve for all their cruelties to be proceeded against as publique delinquents to the State.

As touching their oath, it is one of the worst (I am confident) that ever was made, which I shall here insert for every mans knowledge. You shall swear to be good and true to our Soveraign Lord the Kings Majesty, and to his Heir is and Successors, you shall be obedient and assistant to Mr. Governour, his Deputy, and Deputies, and assistants of marchants of East land, all statutes and ordinances which bee, or shall be made by the said Governour, or by his deputies, and assistants standing inforce, you shall truly hold and keep, having no singular regard to your self, in hurt or prejudice of the common-weal of the said fellowship, you shall heal, and not bewray, and if you shall know any manner of person or persons which intend any burk, harm, or prejudice to our said Soveraign Lord the Kings Majesty, or unto his land, or to the foresaid fellowship or priviledges of the same you shall give knowledge there of, and do it so be known to the said Governour or his deputy, and you shall not colour or free any Forraigners goods not free of the said fellowship, all which you shall hold and keep to the uttermost of your power, or else being justly condemned for making default in any of the premises, you shall truly from time to time, being orderly demanded, content and pay to the treasiner of this Company for the time being, all and every such mulcts and penalties which have beene or shall be limitted and set for the transgressors of the same. So God you help.

Lieutenant Col. Lilburn in his late book called Innocency and Truth justified, being an answer to Mr. Frivs look, called the lyar confounded, hath these passages, pag. 53. And in the the second place, seeing they know, viz. the merchant adventurers that the Petition of Right doth condemn the King and his Privie Counsell for making and administring of oaths, not made by common consent in Parliament, and seeing the Parliament as they very well know, was lately so angry at the Bishops, and their convocation, for &illegible; to themselves the boldnes to make in oath, although they were invested with a more colourable authority to justifie them therein, then these can pretend, how exemplary ought the punishment of these men to be for their impudence and boldnes, after the knowledge of all this, to force and presse upon the freemen of England, an oath of their own framing and making, and to keep their freedoms from them, because out of Conscience they dare not take them, which at this present day is the condition of one Mr. Johnson late servant to Mr. Whitlock one of the East Country Monopolizing Merchants, which is all one in nature with the Monopoly of Merchant Adventurers: And not onely do they most unjustly iustly keep my freedom from me, for which I have so often ventured my life in the Northern service this present warres, and to which I was born by the law, although I have served 7. years according to the Custome of the City of London, but most inhumanely have taken from me my place of Factorship in the Eastland, and all because I have rejected their monopoly and Diabolicall oath, and this was the gallant service of Mr. Burnel Governour and his associates, the 3. Octob. 1645. but I expect to see Justice (that banished exile return in all her glory, and these oppressing task-masters called to a just account: for certain I am, that the law never gave them authority to make an oath, or to force it upon my conscience; besides the oath containe to many perjucies, in the second branch it ties the swearer to be assistant to Mr. Governour and his confederates in all their dishonest proceedings. In the third branch, to keep all their pernicious laws and Ordinances; which Lawes and Ordinances are to deprive the subject of his right, and this will not satisfie, but to all that are to be made, O intollerable burthen! whither will this bottomlesse pit go? here is &c. &c. &c. and in memorable company of &c. In the fourth branch, to keepe all their cozening secrets and underhand dealings in the pursuance of their patent. And in the fifth branch, for making default in any of the premises, that is, for forswearing himself, which he doth that keeps it, aswell as he that keeps it not because be swears not in truth, in judgment, and in righteousnes, to pay such mulcts and penalties which have been or shall be limitted and set for the transgressors of the same, as if such great crimes could be washed away with a pennance: for my part I am clear in this point, that whosoever he bee that bends & yeelds obedience to this or the like oath, deserves not the name of an englishman surely their designes are to use the expression of Lieu. Col. Lilburn in page the 54. of his book speaking against the merchant adventures, to make England a land of slavery, ignorance and beggery, or else a land of perjury: I have now learned the meaning of the Scripture Rev. 13. 16. 17. And he causeth all both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads, that time might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name: which relates as I conceive to all monopolics whatsoever, Jublata causa tollitur effectus, take but away these Merchants patents, and all other of the like nature, and there will a sudden way appear to the relief of the honest, comfort and tranquility to the whole Nation: for the effecting wherof, if I shall but irritate the courteous Reader, it is price sufficient for him whose desire it is not to live, but in the truth.

FINIS.

 


8.28. John Selden, Tyth-gatherers, no Gospel Officers (27 January, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Selden, Tyth-gatherers, no Gospel Officers. Or, Certaine briefe observations concerning the institution and paying of tythes, whereby it appears that men were never compelled to the payment of them in the Old Testament, nor did ever practice it in the New: that the Gospel contributions were all voluntary accounted as a free gift, not a debt; the apostles themselves, not only choosing to labour with their owne hands, but requiring all their successours to doe the like, that they might not bee chargeable to any of their disciples. Together with some quotations out of Mr. Selden, a Member of the House of Commons, his History of Tythes, for the writing whereof he was much troubled by the Episcopall tythmongers of those times, from whom the Presbyterian church-publicans of these days, have learnt to persecute with far greater violence, all such as doe but speak against their Gospel-taxations.

Estimated date of publication

27 January, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 417; Thomason E. 319. (2.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Epistle to the Reader.

Christian Reader:

THis little Pamphlet would not have needed a preparatory Epistle, were there not amongst us a very great generation who are parties in the point I speak of; I shall therefore crave leave to propound unto them, before they read it, whether the Clergy-bellies of these times can bee any whit better Christians, than Demetrius the Silver-Smith with his Craftsmen, Act 19. 19. 20. &c. whilst they cry out, Great is the God of tithes! Sacred is the duty of tithes! of tythes we fill, and swift, hold belly, hold; were it not for tythes learning would be neglected, the Ministery despised, and wee must take paines like other filly people of the &illegible;: Let us rather craw the Prisons full, as wee doe our guts with tythe pigs, of all such as sacrilegiously refuse to pay us tythes.

Let me likewise intreat them to consider, whether it were not the same Tyth-spirit, the spirit of covetousnesse, which caused the Masters of the Damsell, out of whom Paul cast the evill spirit, Act. 16. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. &c. not only to hang backe from receiving the Gospell, but even to persecute the Apostles for cutting off that Divelish gaine which the evill spirit had wont to bring them? Let them interrogate their owne consciences, whether they believe it to bee Scripture or good doctrine, that a gift blindeth the wise, and perverteth the words of the righteous, Ex. 23. 8. Deut. 16. 19. that it destroyeth the heart, Ecclesiastes 20. 29. corrupting their very understandings, in such manner, that they even perswade themselves to be in the right, when they were never more in the wrong: Let such, I say, who alwayes had, and still have the faculties of their soules imprinted with this gift or rather theft of tithes, consider and suspect themselves to be no competent Judges, how much this Gospel-tithing favors of &illegible; &illegible; and is inconsistent with the subjects propriety.

Being thus prepared, I shall desire them with mee to observe, that the Levites being excluded from possessing any inheritance in the land of Cannan, unlesse the Lord had given them his owne portion and inheritance the tythes, Deut. 18. 1. 2. they must have starved; and yet we finde not that the Lord gave them any compulsive power for lavying and bringing in this contribution of tythes: But under the Gospell, where the whole land is open and free to all alike, to Clergy as well as to Laity, to purchase and keep possession of, where the Apostles practice was to labour with their owne hands, 1 Thess. 2. 9. and Pauls expresse command to all in generall, that if any would not worke hee should not eat, 2 Thess. 3. 10. for a supposititious illegitimate tribe of Levi, who are not above the five hundreth part of the Kingdom (there being upon calculation thought to be not above one Clergyman to every 500. men and women) to lay claime to, and by violence possesse themselves of the tythes of all encrease, free of all charges, which in valuation is better then if the fifth part of the whole land were divided amongst them for gleab-land, whereof most of them have some small pittance besides their tythes, is the greatest cheat and robbery which was ever practised; I say yet more briefly, that if the whole Kingdome were to bee divided into 500. parts, the Clergy (as I said before, being but as one to 500. by computation) besides the free denization which they enjoy in common withall other people, run away with about one hundred and twenty five shares, I mean with about one hundred and twenty five times as much as any of their fellows; Oh prodigy of Covetousnesse I but I must decipher it more cleerly.

Suppose there were 500. men and women in a Country Parish, and all the land in that Parish to be worth 2000 l. by the yeare; the Minister, who is but one of the aforesaid 500. pretends 200 l. for his tithes of the abovesaid 2000 l. cleer of all charges, which said charges on all arrable grounds one with another, for manuring, seed-corne and reaping, &c. or of stocking pasture ground, together with the hazard of a small crop, or death of cattell, is so great, as that the land-lords to bee free of paying tythes, the tenth sheafe cleere of charges, had better give the fifth acre of all their lands for gleab-land unto the Minister.

Thus then their tythes of 2000 l. amount in valuation unto the fifth part of 2000 l. which is 400 l. & this 400 l. for the Minister being taken out of 2000 l. which is the whole revenue of the Parish land, there remaines 1600 l. to be divided amongst 499. men and women, who are the Parishioners, which is not full 3 l. 4 s. 1 d. &illegible; a peere, whereas the minister devours 400 l. which is more than any 124. of his Parishioners enjoy, upon such a calculation, supposing them to be all poore, or all rich alike. And yet the unfatiablenesse of these Clergy-bellies is not herewith content, but they lay claime to tithes on house rent, and the truth part of whatsoever any person of any profession, doth any wayes lawfully advance, to be due unto the Minister of the Gospel both by the law of God and man, unlesse some speciall custome, composition or priviledge of the place allowed by law, exempt him: They are the very words of that Episcopall, Presbyteriall, Ambodexterous Tythe-Champion (for Tythes are a common motto to both parties.) Dr. Burgesse, an eminent member of this present Assembly, in a Discourse of his entituled. A new discovery of personall Tythes, or the tenth part of mint cleare gaines, &c. p. 1. as I finde it observed in John the Baptist, Chap. 2. about Christs order and the Disciples practice concerning the Ministers maintenance, &c.

But why tro did not the Dr. with his brethren in covetousnesse, as well claime tythes of children, as of fruit and personall gaines, whereof we finde not the least mention in either of the Testaments? Surely they would not continue so indulgent, they would not hate us our children, could they but get it once enacted, that it might bee lawfull for them to fell tythe children in the market as well as tythe pigs: and to deale clearly, the Leviticall law, from whence they seeke to colour tythes, subjected every first borne, whether it were of man or beast, unto this tax of tithes, it fell unto the Priests share, Lev. 13. 2. c. 22. 29. Numb. 18. 15. the Leviticall Priest was to have the first borne of children, unlesse they were redeemed, and our English Priests, could they but get an Ordinance of Lords and Commons for it, as well as tythes, I should not trust their curtesies.

Tell me, good Reader, who ever thou art, didst thou ever think these fair pretending Clergymen, every one whereof having devoured above 124. of his brethren by divine right, as they alleadge, their tythe patent which they say God granted the, should be yet thus Canine-like hungry: this craving as of their own meer phantasie & invention to lay title unto the tenth part of all clear gains besides, which would be many times more then the Leviticall tithes amounted to (the gaine of handicraft mysteries and trading, being by manifold, more considerable than the encrease of all the land in England?) and that which is yet more irrationall and pestiferous, they will have it whether we will or no, they wrest it from us by violence, they rob us of it: ’Tis not my desire thou shouldest take this calculation upon trust: Nature hath taught every reasonable man Arithmeticke enough to make triall of it, the truth thereof, when thou thy self perceivest and consideress the consequence, I shall not so much desire thee to stand amazed, as to contribute thy ingredient for curing our Clergymen of this their desperate covetousnes, which is Idolatry, Col. 3. 5. Farewell.

To the Reverend Assembly of Divines at Westminster.

Men, Brethren, and Fathers:

I Could not choose but give you notice of a Designe discovered unto mee, of no small a party which at present is conspiring, how the possessions of Bishops, Deanes and Chapters, &c. which by our Ancestors were intended for publique and pious uses, may become their peculiar inheritances, and totally discourage posterity from all charitable legacies, when they shall see them alienated to such quite contrary purposes.

I understand likewise of severall Petitions by multitudes of the most conscientious free-borne subjects of England, demonstrating how unjust it is, that a small number, who in complement call themselves our Ministers, should at their owne pleasure become our Masters and so contrary to the subjects liberty, force from us the fifth part of the whole Kingdome in valuation without either articles or consent, and that which is worst of all, even not to be longer endured by such as make conscience of any thing, they lay claime to is by Divine right, and for such services, as to many seem little lesse than Antichristian, or Idolatrous: ’Tis frivoleus for you to distinguish between a conscience truly informed, and contrarily; for, unlesse you will pretend your arguments to be like the peace of God which passeth all understanding, Phil. 4. 7. you must unavoidably permit men, even every particular man for himselfe, to resolve the whole Scripture and every part thereof into a full perswasion of his owne heart concerning whatsoever he is to practise or believe, Rom. 14. 5. 22. 23. either grant this, or burne your Bibles, how many soever differing translations, with their whole impressions, as have been brought unto you, since you doe but teach your Lay-people to suspect them all, whilst you your selves will not be ruled by any, in any mans judgement besides your owne.

A word to the wise should be enough; It is of so great interest and consequence to this whole Kingdome, for our respect or other, to demolish and root out the &illegible; memory of this Tith-Idoll, which all other Reformed Christians have long since abominated, that it concernes you to looke out some other maintenance lesse scandalous, and more Gospel-like.

But you’l say perhaps, you have maintenance allotted you by Ordinance of Parliament: what an Ordinance of Parliament? I reverence Ordinances of Parliament; &illegible; me thinke, you should rather &illegible; for refuge to Christs Ordinants; Ordinances of Parliament are repealable, what one Parliament bistowes upon you, another Parliament may take away, but Christs Ordinances, are like himselfe, unchangeable; what ever you thinke of him, doubtlesse you cannot leave him for a better Master: Try then a little, compare the Ordinances together, looke before you leap, if ye be Men, if Christians, consider which may prove the surest, the better title.

Christ ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live by the Gospell. 1 Cor. 9. 14. that is, they should have such a livelihood as is set out, and warranted by the Gospel, which is the free benevolence and bounty of their brethren, and if you will have it in Christs owne words unto the &illegible; Disciples, That into whatsoever house they enter they should remain eating and drinking such things as were set before them, Luk. 10. 5. 7. 8. and having food and rayment they should be there with content, 1 Tim. 6. 8, On the other side:

The Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled, Die Veneris, 8 Novemb. 1644. Ordaine that every person or persons within the Realme of England and Dominion of Wales, shall pay all and singular tithes, offerings, oblations, obventions, rates for tithes, and all other duties commonly known by the name of tithes, unto the respective owners both Lay and Ecclesiasticall.

This is the effect of Christs Ordinance, with that of the Lords and Commons in Parliament: I shall not seek to make enmity betwixt them, and I hope every Reader, will, in time, see how far forth they will run parallel. What will you more then? Our Saviour, you see, has by an Ordinance of heaven provided for you both food and rayment, requiring you by his Apostle Paul to be therewith content.

But me thinke I heare you murmuring that this Gospel maintenance, being by the Spirit of God termed a free gift, 2 Cor. 8. 4. Phil. 4. 17. a matter of bounty, and not grudging, 2 Cor. 9. 5. you have not the conscience, what ever your practice &illegible; to think you may command it at your pleasure, have it whether your &illegible; will or no; and ’tis irksome to your high &illegible; to suppose your selves their Almesmen, and live on their benevolence. But what advantage have you by your tithe Ordinance? how, I pray, will you get your tithes, if the people will not pay them? how can you force them to it, if the people be resolved on the contrary? Oh! I know your meaning, you’l distraine their goods, imprison their persons, and with some vexations accursed act or other, you’l take away their lives, and all they have together: but are you so stout and stardy (not being perhaps above one for a thousand of your Lay-brethren) as to imagine that a Regiment of Blackcoats, can, with a bare humane Ordinance of tithes, defeat a whole Nation, both of their Christian and Civill priviledges? beleeve &illegible; bold Souldiers, you will finde hard service of &illegible; the peoples eyes begin to be open, and if you discover the &illegible; of your &illegible; covetousnesse a little more, they will, questionlesse, so far reflect on the expresse clear words in our Saviours Commission unto his true Disciples, saying, Freely you have received, freely give, Mat. 10. 8. that your &illegible; praying and preaching will grow contemptible, and our exercising Weavers, Feltmakers; &illegible; &c. be found more to resemble trust Ministers of the Gospel, them your learned Doctorships. But because I see some of you are not ashamed to be thought Politicians, who take for granted that you may & ought to be provident, no lesse then your Lay brethren, both for your selves and families; I hope I shall not prove an unwelcome Monitor, if I be instant with you to &illegible; seriously, whether it be for your benefit to wave Christs Ordinance, and adhere unto the Parliaments for maintenance.

&illegible; the Lords and Commons have been beautifull unto you, most transcendently beautifull, no Protestant State did ever doe the liked (I wish it were well considered) they give you tithes with an &c. offerings, oblations, &c above a tenth part, even above the fifth in a just valuation, of all that the land produceth: But what if they should give you halfe, or three quarters of all we have? can you enjoy it longer then good people please to pay it you? I hope, it will not be impertinent, towards meaning you from a Canonicall obedience, by minding you that there have been many laws agreed on in Parliament, which never had execution afterwards, for want of a secondary, and more effectuall assenting of the people in generall, whom the Parliament does but represent. You know, likewise, much may be said, both from Law and Custome, in behalfe of the Kings Prerogative, Revennes, and not much lesse than a boundlesse subjection, and yet you see, how little be hath of either for the present; a Prince can reigne no longer over the persons of his subjects, than bee can master their affections; A usurped tyrannicall power is of &illegible; continuance, but the free consent and love of a people, is that only, which makes all Empire durable and happy.

&illegible; then forth &illegible; &illegible; that a Nation which &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; of so &illegible; &illegible; (&illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; upon all &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;) with the lesse as so &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; from the &illegible; &illegible; of &illegible; &illegible; will &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; both &illegible; and &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; which &illegible; with their &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; of their &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; their &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; of their &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; of &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; things, and you &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; when they for &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;

&illegible; then a &illegible; which &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; upon the peoples &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; your &illegible; &illegible; their Christian &illegible; &illegible; which to many of &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; with &illegible; evill &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;

&illegible; &illegible; take &illegible; much &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; upon your &illegible; &illegible; was &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; and &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; the &illegible; &illegible; to &illegible; of you, and &illegible; &illegible; enough (for they have &illegible; &illegible; and &illegible; to you beyond desert) &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &c.

&illegible; &illegible; Friends, they are &illegible; &illegible; after, and of, &illegible; your &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; like enough &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; your &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; (&illegible; &illegible;) you may yet sure will.

Estate.

&illegible; &illegible; 10. read of &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; neither &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;.

Certaine briefe Observations concerning the institution and paying of tythes in the Old Testament, with the Ministers maintenance in the New; neither of which was levied in a compulsive manner, nor could possibly becomes sweet favour in the nostrills of the Lord, had they not beene given freely, as a matter of bounty, not gradgingly.

HAving often in my saddest thoughts bewayled the lamentable condition, which Gods dearest people are brought into, through that accursed yoake of a forced uniformity, which is endeavoured to be put upon their consciences, and casting about what evill spirit it was, that had so vast a malignant influence throughout the world; at last, it appeired cleerly unto my understanding, that it could not possibly, for the most part, bee any other, besides that Grand Idol or rather divell of covetousnesse, which is the root of all evill and mischiefe that happeneth unto mankind, Col. 3. 5. 1 Tim. 6. 10. Act. 19. 19. 20. c. 16. 16, 17, 18, &c.

Then; pondering with my selfe, how this Imp of covetousnesse, as it produced persecution, was suckled and maintain’d; I found at last, that it must necessarily be both begotten and continued by that specious golden wedge of Gospel-tythes, which an illegitimate Tribe of &illegible; had at first, only Ackon-like, purloyned from their brethren, but afterwards presumptuously &illegible; upon God himselfe, that both they and their successors, might with an uncontroleable security live and dye forfeting upon the farnesse thereof.

But if any man perceive not how it comes about, that a covering after tythes begets persecution; I answer, that these &illegible; as Esaiah describes those of his time, 56. 11. terming them greedy dogs, which can never be satisfied, are so intent upon the gaine which commeth from their quarters, (that since they cannot for shame require contributions from such as refuse out of conscience to joyne with them in Church duties) they put themselves upon inveying with all manner of exasperation and bitternesse, against all such as differ from them, whether in discipline or doctrine, continually insencing both their Parishoners and Civill Magistrates against them as Heretickes, such as hold dangerous opinions destructive to the State, not to be endured upon any quarter and composition, because no accommodation can bee to their purpose wherein Tythes are not the prine pall article to be agreed upon.

In contemplation hereof, I put my selfe againe to search the Scripture, (though I know there is scarce any one how vile soever, whether for practice or opinion only, who pretends not to be Gospel-proofe, but I speake to such of whom John the Evangelist said, Scarth the Scriptures for in them yet thinke to have eternall life, Joh. 5. 39. to such I say, who would be thought to have the Scripture for their rule, and really expect salvation by living according to that rule) and am willing to give a faithfull, though briefe relation thereof, on such particulars I mean, as have not to my knowledge beene published by others, to shew how vaine the ground is of pretending Gospel-tythes, and how dangerous to continue them.

The first place I meet with speaking &illegible; Tythes is Gen. 14. 20. where Abraham is &illegible; to give Melchisedeck &illegible; of all, that is, of all the spoile only, which he had in the victory against the &illegible; Kings in rescuing of his brother Let. whom they had taken prisoner, as you may see in the same Chapter: and though it be objected that the Apostle Paul seemes to tell the Hebrews that Abraham give &illegible; of all things unto Melchisedeck Heb. 7. 2. yet you may find that the same Apostle in v. 4. whilst he would magnifie the preheminence of Melchisedeck in his relation of receiving tythes, before Abraham paying tythes, instances only in his paying him tythes of the spoyls, but had Abraham paid tythes of all things he possessed, the Apostles argument might have thereby been so much more improved, if he had urg’d it. But this paying tythes unto Melchisedeck was supereminently typicall, as Melchisedeck was a type of Christ, Heb. 8. 4. 5. and in that respect only, Paul &illegible; that Melchisedeck received tythes of Abraham blessing him that had the promise, and without &illegible; the &illegible; is blessed of the greater, Heb. 7. 6. 7. for even the tribe of Levi is said to pay tythes &illegible; Melchisedeck in the loynes of Abraham, Heb. 7. 9. 10. and the Levites could not be properly said in the same time and respect, both to pay tythes in Abraham, and yet receive tythes in Melchisedeck, so that this is no Scripture for their purpose; the very tribe of Levi paid tythes unto Melchisedeck, and therefore neither they, nor a supposititions offspring of theirs much lesse, pretend with any other than a &illegible; &illegible; and countenance, to derive a just grant and title from Melchisedeck for receiving tythes; but besides these words of Pauls to the Heb. 7. 5. The Levites who received the office of Priest-hood, had commandement for receiving tythes according to the Law, doe plainly teach us that the payment of tythes, the tenths of all encrease, as our selfe seeking Clergy will have it understood, began not till the law was given, and that the Levites had the Priesthood entailed upon their Tribe, and consequently that till then there was no commandement for paying them, nor any body warranted to receive them.

Gen. 18. 20. 21. 22. We finde that Jacob when &illegible; went to Laban at Padan-Aram to take a wife, being on the way of &illegible; so called anciently, but by him named Bethel, v. 19. in the morning alter his vision, he made a vow unto God, saying, If God will be wish me and keepe me in &illegible; way that I goe, and will give me bread to eat, and vaimens to part also that I came again to my fathers house in &illegible; then, of all that &illegible; shalt give me, I will surely give the tenth unto thee.

Upon this occasion it will not be &illegible; to remember that all vows ought to be voluntary; such is this promising of Jacob, and Abrahams paying tythes unto Melchisedeck, neither of them being commanded, nor so much as usually practised from Abraham his full paying to this time of Jacobs vowing them: for if Jacob had been obliged, or but accustomed to pay tythes from the time that Abraham first paid them unto Melchisedeck, this present vowing of his would have been different from the nature of a vow, which is of some new thing not customarily, much lesse obligatorily performed before; nay, it might have seemed a kinde of deriding God Almighty, in pretending to doe some extraordinary service, prefixing thereunto the sacred preamble and title of a vow, but in the upshot, not so much as promise more, than was both due and ordinarily discharged before: then secondly, these tythes Jacob vowes not to begin to pay them, till he returne unto his fathers house in peace, which we know was many years after, and is a certaine argument that till their he made no reckoning of paying a continuall fixed tythe or tenth part of what God gave him, at least we see no example of it.

Levit. 27. 30. 32. &illegible; &illegible; all the tythe of the land both of the seed of the ground, and of the fruit of the trees is the Lords, it is holy to the Lord and every tythe at bullock and of sheep, and of all that &illegible; under the red, the tenth of all shall be holy unto the Lord: and v. 34. ’tis said, these are the &illegible; &illegible; of the Lord by Moses unto the children of Israel in &illegible; &illegible; so that before that time, there was no &illegible; &illegible; for paying of &illegible;

These &illegible; being &illegible; set apart by &illegible; Lord, are in Numh. 18. 21. 24. appropriated unto the &illegible; of Law, but neither to be enjoyed by the Levites, nor paid by the Israelites, untill they came into the land of Canaan, as appeares in that the Lord &illegible;. I have given is &illegible; therefore shall they possesse &illegible; inheritance among the children of Israel, v. 24. that is, in the land of Canaan, as is likwise imposed upon Aaron, v. 20. for before that time, both Aarons and the other families of the Levites had their proper inheritances and possessions, as had the other Tribes, Deut. 18. 8.

Here then we may observe, that by Gods ordinance there was no tythes of any thing due, save of the seed of the ground, of the fruit of the trees, and of foure footed beasts, Lev. 27. 30. 32. both fish and fowls were free, much lesse doe we finde here any tythes, any excise put upon mens labours; that was likely thought a duty to be exacted and collected rather by Publicans, then by a consecrated Tribe of Levi, concerning whom the Lord said, that, from what time their tythes grew due, it should be a law for ever throughout their generations, that among the children of Israel they possesse no inheritance, Num. 18. 23. which I much wonder how such as claime tythes at this day doe yet dispence withall; I meane, how these pretended Clergy-men should both receive tythes, and yet enjoy all manner of inheritances and possessions in common with the Laity.

Then; as we finde in Numb. 18. 29. the Levites were cut of their tythes to pay the one tenth for an offering unto Aaron and his family, who was also of the Tribe of Levi, Gen. 4. 14. and for this respect, as also in that the Lord gave him the offerings of all hallowed things, whether meat-offerings, sin-offerings or trespasse-offerings, v. 8. 9. he was also to have no inheritance in the land of Canaan, the Lord promising him to be his part among the children of Israel, v. 20. Now, unlesse this pretended Tribe of Levi, can finde out one besides the Pope, who like Aaron, has as good a title to the heave-offering, as they themselves have unto the tythes of all; me thinks they should be jealous of their owne title, and let it fall to ground for shame, if not for modesty.

Besides the tithes of all encrease, the lewes were with their houshold to eat another tenth the &illegible; at Ierusalem in the sight of God, Deut. 14. 23. but if the way were far, so that they could not carry the tithes &illegible; conveniently, then they might sell it at their homes, and carrying the mony unto Ierusalem, buy what their hearts desired, and there, &illegible; it before the Lord, rejoycing with their housholds, v. 24, 25, 26. This &illegible; some conceive to be due of feasting two years in three, though the text may well be understood of every year, v. 23. for all that I &illegible; to the contrary.

But I wonder whether they were thus to spend a whole &illegible; in feasting, as the text seems to &illegible;, v. 23. 26. and the &illegible; even to this day spend both much money and time in feasting, or whether they saw a part thereof thus spent at Jerusalem, leaving the rest for the benefit of the Levites, as they did the other tithes.

Then we finde Deut. 14. 28. 29. & c. 26. &illegible;. that every third years they were to lay up one tenth in store at their owne &illegible;, for the use of the Levites, strangers, fatherlesse and widows; so that by this calculation, they paid and spent two tenths yearly, if not full three tenths every third year, of all their cattell, and what the earth produced.

David tells us, P. 110. 4. That our Saviour was a Priest after the order of Melchisedech; and Paul saies that be pertained unto another Tribe, whereof no man served at the altar; and that it was evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; concerning which tribe Moses spake nothing touching the Priesthood, Heb. 7. 13, 14. & v. 12. if the Priesthood be changed, them of necessity must there be a change of the Law: from whence, together with v. 5. which &illegible; that the &illegible; of Levi, who received the office of Priesthood had a commandment to take tythes according to the Law; it followes:

1. That the Leviticall tither, the tenths of all things are as much abollished as the Leviticall Priesthood it selfe, v. 12. so that the present Ministers under the Gospel can no more pretend unto the one, than to the other.

2. What ever tythes were due unto Melchisedech, the same became due afterwards, and were payable unto our Saviour, who was a Priest after the order of Melchisedech, (at the whole Leviticall Priesthood was typicall, a shadow of heavenly things, Heb. 8. 4. 5.) and of whom Melchisedech was a type; that is, they were to be fulfilled in our Saviour, to whom only all homage and subjection is due from Abraham, and his posterity, and from whom only both Abraham and his posterity are to expect their blessing: so that as our Saviour, laid no claime, nor received &illegible; or Leviticall tythes which Paul saies must necessarily be changed with the Priesthood: much lesse ought they who will approve themselves &illegible; Ministers and followers of Christ, to bee, so greedy after them, since it renders them so much unlike their Master.

Being evident then that &illegible; or materiall tythes have never beene due, &illegible; Saviour that other Priest as Paul calls him, arose after similitude of Milchisedech, who was not made a Priest after the law of &illegible; commandement, Heb. 7. 15. 16. it followeth that all such &illegible; have, or doe exact and compell men to pay them tythes, doe but &illegible; them in effect, and thereby become accountable both to God and man.

Mr. Roberte in a Treatise entituled The &illegible; of the Gospell &illegible; tythes due to the Ministery by the word of God. c. 7. &illegible; 52. &c. saies to this purpose, that our Saviour received tythes in the New Testament, and endeavours to prove it from these words to the Heb. 7. 8. Here &illegible; dye that receive tythes, but there be receiveth them of &illegible; is it witnessed that &illegible; &illegible; and will have whatsoever is spoken of Melchisedech, to be meant of Christ from v. 13. 14. v. &illegible;. He of whom: &illegible; are spoken &illegible; to another tribe, whereof no men served at the altar, for it is evident that &illegible; Lord sprang out of Judah.

But how unwarrantably, or little to the purpose, will easily appear, if we consider not only who this is that the Apostle saith, &illegible; tythes and liveth, distinguishing him from those who received tythes and dyed; but also what this there signified, which is likewise differenced from here; and if the men which received tithes and dyed, and he which receiveth tithes and liveth for ever, be not one and the same (which may well &illegible; reconciled, whilst the one was typicall, and the other the &illegible;) then must there needs bee two receiving of tithes, which how far forth so ever they be considered on, or spun out in &illegible; discourses; what will it make to the pretence of a whole tenth of every thing to bee &illegible; due unto the Clergy?

Suppose Christ did, or doth still, in some sense receive tithes: ’tis in no other sense, be it what it will, than in the very same sense, wherein be received them under the Law even when he was on earth; or &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; ascended into heaven both as our High Priest and sacrifice v. 27. which would evidently condemne all such of most &illegible; &illegible; and blasphemy, who should lay claime to them by such &illegible; &illegible;

Doe wee finde it any where commanded to give &illegible;, real tithes of all we have unto our Saviour? did he take or so much as require them when he was on earth &illegible; Aaron and Melchisedech did? it not the Priesthood which the Apostle there speaks of changed, v. 12. and therewithall the very law even that of tithes changed, as well as other particulars thereof, as that which made nothing perfect, v. 39.

But the truth is, that if tithes have any establishment by Abrahams giving Melchisedech the tenth of all his spoyles, it would follow, that the Clergy should primarily have the tenth of all prize-goods and spoyles of War, particularly of these present Wars of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and so much plainly affirmed by Mr. &illegible; Roberts in his Revenue of the Gospel, c. 6. p. 30. 31. which I hope not only the Souldiery, but the State also will seriously consider of, and discharge a good conscience, by making restitution to them, or requiring an account of their judgement in this behalfe.

And now as touching what is said in the New Testament concerning the Ministers maintenance, I find: not there the least footsteps that tythes or any first allowance instead thereof was either made payment of, or commanded; it was left to be a free-will offering, as most sutable to the Gospel; only the equity there of is hinted at in severall passages; as, The workman is worthy of his meat, Matth. 10. 10. The labourer is worthy of his hire, Luke 10. 7. Who goeth to Warfare any time at his owne charge? Who planteth a vineyard and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who seedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? even so hath the Lord ordained that they which &illegible; the Gospell should live by the Gospell, 1. Cor. 5. 7. 14. They which minister about holy things, live on the things of the Temple, &illegible; they which wait on the altar are partakers with the altar, 1. Cor. 9. 13. This is all that the New Testament &illegible; us, and that by way of equity only, how to proportion &illegible; a maintenance to the Ministers of the Gospell.

Then, as touching both the Ministers and Beleevers practice in this particular, 1. Paul tells the Corinthians that he had kept himself from &illegible; burthensome unto &illegible;, and so &illegible; resolved &illegible; keep himselfe at the &illegible; of Christ was in him, and that no man should &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; of his in the Regions of &illegible;, 2 Cor. 11. 9. 10. But in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, c. 9. v. 15. 18. 23. he insinnates, that it were better for him to dye, than that this &illegible; of his, of not making the Gospell chargeable should be prevented; neither was this Paul &illegible; &illegible; himselfe only, but it seems be gave &illegible; and &illegible; others as &illegible; them, expresse order that their Ministery likewise should &illegible; become burthensome unto the Corinthians, 2 Cor. 12. 16. 17. 18.

And when he came to &illegible;, he called the Elders of the Church together, Act. 20. 17. and having had a large discourse with them wherein he told them that he had not &illegible; to declare &illegible; &illegible; all the counsell of God, v. 27. hee put them notwithstanding in minds againe how he had coveted no mans silver, nor gold, nor apparrell, yea that they themselves knew, how those hands of his had ministred unto his necessities, and to them that were with them, v. 33. 34. adding that he had shewed them all things, how that so labouring they ought to support the weake, v. 35.

The same Paul with Silvanus and Timotheus, told the &illegible; that they wrought with labour night and day that they might not bee chargeable to any of them, and that they might be an example unto them to doe the like, even unto them of the Ministery, if there be any who could say with Paul that they had power to eat and drinke, that they had power to forbeare working as well as any of the Apostles, 1 Cor. 9. 4. 5. 6. Even such I say, are required by Paul, Silvanus and Timotheus to worke with labour and travell night and day that they may not be chargeable unto any, 2 Thes. 3. 8. 9.

However we may not thinke so uncharitably of the Primitive Christians, that they did not, and that liberally too, contribute unto their Ministers, I meane, such as were able: Paul beares witnesse of their readinesse both to the Romans, Corinthians and Philippians, certifying us that they were willing even beyond their power, 2 Cor. 8. 3. 4. and that in so large a measure, as the text saies in severall planes that they sold their possessions, and persed them to all men as they had need, laid them &illegible; the Apostles seet, or had all things in common, so that no man said, that ought of the things hee possessed was his owne, Acts 2. 44. 45. Chap. 4. 32. 35.

But as the Scripture sayes, not many noble, not many rich were called, 1 Cor. 1. 26. so it is cleare in all history, that the poverty of the Primitive Christiane was generall; and so it may have been observed to be in all ages even till these present dayes; from whence wee finde it so often objected to the disparagement of such as now seeke after truth, what are they but a company of poore, base, contemptible people, such as have nothing to lose? as if there were nothing worth Insing besides the rich mens Idols, of superfluity and &illegible; who in consequence to their owne saying, must thinke nothing besides these worth getting: But alas I have not such poore contemptible Christians, in these mens account, soules to lose, as well as they? He promise them, they have soules to save, better then they: The truth is, they want the temptation of wealth and greatnesse, which too too commonly overswayes men from seeking after truth, as it pleases God to discover it by peace-meales, and in such manner only, as we grow capable to receive it; being apt to thinke they were the poore Christians of whom it was said, that from John Baptist untill the Apostles time the Kingdome of heaven suffered violence, and the violent took it by force, Mar. 11. 12. I hope the Reader will pardon this digression, and so I returne to the point againe.

It is acknowledged then that under the Gospell, a competent and comfortable maintenance is due unto the Ministery; yet this the Apostles did, not only, not capitulate for, but Paul alleadges two most craphaticall reasons, which might prevaile with any man that were not a very &illegible;, or had any sparks of piety remaining in him, that they should betake themselves to any lawfull calling, and worke even night and day with their owne hands, as hee did, rather then be reduced to need the benevolence of their brethren, saying, It is more blessed to give than to receive, Act. 20. 35. and that the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for their children, 2 Cor. 2. 14.

And if at any time the Apostles did stand in need, and that the Disciples, of their owne Christian disposition, gave them any thing, the Apostles still received it as a gift, 2 Cor. 8. 3. 4. a matter of bounty, c. 9. 5. expresly declaring that they sought not theirs but them, 2 Cor. 12. 13. 14. Nay, Paul would not have accepted of a gift, even to the reliefe of his necessities, had it not beene rather to give them an occasion to shew forth the fruits of their proficiency of their charity, that it might so much the more abundantly redound to their account, Phil. 4. 15. 16. 17. Had Paul been the most eminent &illegible; of his time, as hee was no meane one; had he studied to deliver this notion of his in &illegible; of highest expressions; I cannot conceive how it was possible to out got himselfe herein; but we must impute it to the sufficiency of this Spirit which gave him matter of glorying above all other Apostles, 1 Cor. 15. 10. 2 Cor. 11. 21. 23.

Thus we finde in sundry Scriptures declared, and particularly in Namb. 18. 20. Deut. 10. 9. and 18. 1. Jos. 13. 4. &illegible; 44. 28. that in the distribution of the land of &illegible; amongst the &illegible; the tribe of Lord was to have no inheritance, the Lord promising that he would be their inheritance; but in regard that he had assigned unto them all his owne lot and share, which was the tythes of all that the &illegible; &illegible; Lov. 27. 30. 32. besides that of &illegible; beasts, as also all things &illegible; whether meat offerings, sin offerings or trespasse offerings, v. 8. 9. which was larger stock and proportion than if they had had assigned them these part of the whole land of Canaan; it may be demanded, to what purpose then does God say he will be the Levites portion? I answer, that it may likely bee the Lords intention, that the Levites whom hee &illegible; drawne unto himselfe by a neerer relation of office and service, should not have any certaine permanent inheritance in Canaan, as the other Tribes, but that they should &illegible; upon the tythes, and such other duties as God had first assumed unto himselfe, and then allotted unto them, which being more uncertaine, because of the Israelites would not pay them these duties, these tithes, I finde no coercive power appointed to compell them thereunto, the Lord would notwithstanding have then relye thereon, or rather on himselfe, who promised to be their inheritance, their portion, that is to provide for the Levites, though their brethren should faile of paying tythes; for in other respects the Lord was the inheritance of all the Israelites, all alikes bee failes not to take care and charge of all that trust in him: just so is it with Christs Minister in the New Testament; a maintenance is due unto them from their brethren, but in such a manner, that whosoever will not give them any, cannot be compelled unto it; and from such as give it them, they are to acknowledge it as a gift, 2 Car. 8. 4. Phil. 4. 17.

But least it should bee thought a bare assertion of mine, that they was no compulsive power allotted by God for constraining the Israelites to pay their tithes; let the Reader be pleased to observe how it is said in Samuel, that the sonnes of &illegible; came with a flesh hooke, and striking it into the pot when the people offered sacrifice, tooke all the meat that came up for the Priest, and this they did perform sometimes when they so pleased, 1 Sam. 2. 13. to 16. but we finde they were called sommes of &illegible; for is, v. 12. and the text sayes, their sin was very &illegible; before the Lord, and that for this cause &illegible; abhorred the offering of the Lord v. 17. Besides we see in Malachi 3. 9. 10. Nehem. 13. 10. 11. 11. when the people refused to pay tythes, the Lord complained of them accordingly by his Prophets, but never gave the Magistrate order to punish them for it, or so much as reprehended him for omitting it.

But let &illegible; debate the case a little further with these greedy &illegible; &illegible; doe we not &illegible; by &illegible; how few of them would be &illegible; that their &illegible; their &illegible; should &illegible; &illegible; them, not suffering them to depart, when they found opportunity to remove themselves unto a larger maintenance? and yet if their Parishioners should say, Sir, you expect, require; nay, even competius, hitherto, to pay you tithes, the tenth part of all we have; but now there is a godly man; who would be glad of the opportunity to administer unto us such spirituall things as our soules delight in, and stand to our free will offerings for his maintenance, who would bee abundantly satisfied with one halfe, even any portion what ever it bee, that commeth from us voluntarily.

Wee entreat you therefore give us leave to make use of this advantage in favour both of our purses and our soules: doe you finde these selfe-seeking Clergimen would bee contented to lay downe their pretended Commission? No, ’tis too too evident they would not: Their pretences are; Our livings are given us for our lives, we have as good a title to them as you have to your lands; Nay, they sticke not to flie higher, and even Bishop-like to argue their tenour, providentia Dei, by divine right.

But is this equall brethren? Does Christianity engage us to renounce our Civill rights, our very reason? may these Clergymen who in complement sometimes please to call themselves our Ministers, our servants, (though like their Great Grandfather the Pope who subscribes servour Dei, even whilst hee expects that Kings and Emperours should wait upon him) and have their livelihoods out of our purses, thus &illegible; become our Masters, intrude themselves at first upon us whether we will or no, continue with us as long as they themselves list, take upon them to keep us from the Ordinances when they will, preach what trush and trumpery they please, exact the tithes, which in effect is one &illegible; part of our whole estate, as is made appeare upon calculation in the Epistle to the Reader, and yet leave us it their owne pleasure, when it makes for their advantage? &illegible; his Priest when he could get no more &illegible; imployment, agreed with him by the yeare for 10 &illegible; of silver, a suit of apparell, and his dyes, Judges, 17. 10. 11. but so sophe as hee met with opportunity of becomming Priest unto a whole Tribe, he laid hold thereon with joy, c. 18. v. 19. 20. even thus these Merchants of the Gospel; none in appearance at first more diligent and officious then they untill they got into a Benefice or lecture endeavouring themselves what possibly they can, that, besides their tithee, they may raise the price of their benevolences; but if a more sat Parsonage present it selfe, quit &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; is their practicall divinity, they account it the greatest fully under heaven to refuse it.

For this cause like enough the Answerer of Mr. Pryus 12. Questions used these words concerning them, pag. 20. May it not will be said according to Micah 3. 11. that the Clergy teach for hire, and Prophesie for many, which God by him exclaimed against in his time? doth not the same Prophes say truly of them, v. 5. bee that &illegible; not into their mouthes, they even prepare War against him? do they not with the most prostitute Popelings ery out, No penny, no Pater noster? Is not maintenance, maintenance, the burthen of all their Parlour or Pulpit pastime? and why should they so sacrilegiously set a price on that which is but supposititions, the phancie of their owne braines, the reall truth whereof God required all true Disciples to give for nothing? Mat. 10. 8. Es. 55. 1. 2. or why should people bee forced to buy the chaffer of these Clergy-merchants, rather then the wares or labour of a Shoomaker or porter? would not such dealing be damned for an unjust monopoly, which yet these Encroachers practise without a Patent, if any but themselves should doe the like? Nay, why must we be forced to pay these mercenary Clergymen for such counterfeit service and ministration which others will discharge better, and that for nothing? Is not this the greatest infringing of the Subjects propriety which the Kingdome suffers? I say not this to undervalue the Ministery of the Gospell, or to diswade an ample and abundant maintenence to such as truly labour in Gods Vineyard; but to exaggerate the heynousnesse of those that doe not only set, as they pretend, the &illegible; treasure of the Gospell, the unvaluable Word of God to sale as if it were an unholy thing, Heb. 10. 29. but as much as in them lyes, compell all people and Nations by fire and sword to buy trash and trampery in stead thereof, and that at what price they themselves please.

I know this Controversie will not easily be reconciled; our English Belly-Priests will doubtlesse struggle for their tythes, with no lesse subtillity and &illegible; than the Popish did, for their Supremacy and Peter pence when the Reformation first began; the truth is, they still plead prescription for them in England, though they were long since damned by all Reformed Churches of Scotland, Sweadland, &illegible; France, Germany, the &illegible; and United Provinces, not without the &illegible; &illegible; against of Gods people amongst us ever since, as is evident in their owne and other mens writings upon Record; but bad Lawes, as well as Oathes, are better broke then kept, sitter to be repealed than continued: I wish therefore, amongst such other hard questions and arguments, as have been put to them formerly, in this behalfe, they would likewise take into consideration these few Queries.

What is the difference betwixt a Ministers calling, and any other, whether Handicraft or Tradesmans? wherein are they distinguished? What is requisite to make them both legitimate? Is there not an outward Call, and an inward Call to either of them?

Whether may it now adayes bee infallibly discerned that a Minister is truly called to preach unto a people, any otherwayes, than by the peoples calling of him?

Whether ought a Minister once called and accepted of to preach unto a People or Parish, leave the said Parish or People all his life time upon any pretence whatsoever, without consent of those that first called him?

Whether may a Minister be said to be truly called, who is put upon a Parish, contrary to the wills and approbation of the whole or major part thereof, as is the condition of most Parishes, according to the present Lawes of England?

Whether may such a Minister as is once called to teach in any Parish, withdraw himselfe without being called away by God that called him thither? How may a Minister know when God truly calls him from one Parish to another? Whether is it not most probable that such are not called by God, but run away, who remove from a leane Benefice or Lecture unto a sat one?

Whether did God ever really call any man to the Ministery of the Gospell, without enduing him with gifts sit for such a Calling? What are the necessary signes, gifts, and qualifications of such a Calling?

Whether is it not one necessary qualification of a Minister truly called to divide the word of truth aright, 2 Tim. 2. 15. to bold fast the faithfull word as it hath been taught, and be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort and to convince the &illegible; Tit. 1. 9.

Whether have the Papist, Lutheran, Calvinist, or Anabaptist, Presbyterian or Independant, (any one, or either of them more then the other) any infallible way of exhorting and convincing &illegible; according to Pauls rule to Titus? If they have, why doe they not show it unto their brethren? If they have not, is it not a &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; no true Ministers, no true Christians, that doe not beare with their &illegible; three untill they can convince them?

If it be not in the Clergies power to make it infallibly appeare unto me, that such a one is a Minister unto me, my Minister, after a more &illegible; nor any other manner, than such a one, the very same, by which a man is, or becomes a Servingman unto me, my Servingman, to wit, because I have accepted of, and entertained him into my service; &illegible; what reason may this Minister require the tithes of my estate, whether I will or no, when this Servingman can recover nothing, but what I my selfe will give him or agree for with him? what reason can bee given why every man (if a pretended Minister will be so shamelesse to put him to it) should not capitulate and article with a Minister for his paines, his service, as well as with a Servingman, a Porter? Why may not a Carpenter or Tayler be put upon every Parish, whether the Parish will or no, as well as a Minister; and each of them pretend to doe the worke of the whole Parish in generall, and of every one in particular, compelling them to pay him for it, though he did no works for them, through their default, as well as the Minister?

But that I may be the better induc’d to render all reverence and other dues, which these Clergymen lay claime to, ’tis necessary that I be a little further satisfied concerning the demonstrative verify of so extraordinary a Calling, as they pretend to be invested with, or how they have any &illegible; above all other beleevers, who joyntly so long since were by Peter declared to be a royall Priesthood, 1 Pet. 1. 9.

For all that I can understand, these Clergymen were borne &illegible; naked as well as others; their education at Schools and University (&illegible; say no more) is no better than their fellows, and, in briefe, they are very &illegible; to be distinguished from other men, untill they begin to feel an itching, a longing after Tith-crops, by which (for all that can be discerned) they judge themselves to be ripe, and expect only Gods call unto the Ministery.

Thus far, (I meane till they grow tith-sicke) their progresse is not difficult, the world can apprehend it as well as they themselves; but now forsooth, the &illegible; of Gods house devours them &illegible; Ps. 69. 9. and all &illegible; as may be &illegible; them, must know they have no rest in spirit, through &illegible; &illegible; desire that God would call them to preach the &illegible; &illegible; good people, like enough, enquire and cast about &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; for some vacant Parsonage or &illegible; suddenly one brings newes of 10. 20. 30. 40. or 50. pounds worth of tithes, or other benevolences, which may be compassed, if God so please, (this phrase must in, that God may beare the blame, untill this new Evangelist be pleased;) hee gives them a gracious hearing and acceptance, but finding it too small, inferiour to his tavenous appetite, he still with Moses alleadges, that the Lord hath not yet appeared to him, Exod. 4. 1. Hee doth not apprehend himselfe to be sufficiently called, and thus in the best seeming manner he can, he devours, untill some great Cedar falls to warme him by, untill the stalled Oxe bee killed to feast him with, untill a far Parsonage of 100. 200. or 300. pounds a year grow void, which no sooner happens, but the first to al thereof pierces both his ears, that they stand listning continually, untill his Scoutes, some friend or other propound it to him, which is no sooner mentioned, but as if he were impatient, that his Predecessor had injured him to dye no sooner, he breaks out with Samuel, saying, Speaks Lord, for thy servant heareth, 1 Sam. 3. 10. in briefe, their rule it, God calls them not to small games, they are confident he will not doe them so much injury, he will not have them serve him for nothing, much like to what the Devill said of Joh. c. 1. 9, 10, 11. but if a fat Benefite be mentioned, they runne in full assurance that their God (God Mammon) calls them.

Dear Reader, is this the truth? then ponder on it, and weigh well the consequence thereof; let not thy understanding but any longer captivated; be not superstitious, and thou shalt see greater things than these, Joh. 1. 50.

Cast then thy &illegible; a little on all such as pretend unto the Ministery among us; consider their different wayes and doctrines, and thou shalt finde many of them to agree no lesse then opposites, then contradictions.

Some of them hold the Church of Rome to be a true, though &illegible; and corrupted Church; others, that whosoever lives and dyes in the beliefe thereof, cannot possibly attaine salvation. Some hold the Ministery in the Church of Rome to be a false Ministery, not knowing otherwise how to excuse their separation from it &illegible; Others dare not do so (no more then of their Baptisme) as knowing their owne Ministery to be derived successively from that of Rome. Some hold Episcopacy to be of Divine right a Others say as much for Presbytery; and not a few there be who affirm no peculiar government at all to be by Divine right. Some hold we are &illegible; by &illegible; &illegible; by &illegible; &illegible; without good workes. Some hold that Christ could not bee just and equall, &illegible; he had dyed for all the world alike, even all that would believe on him: Others thinke Christ might possibly have lost his labour, had he not dyed for a set number only, for his Elect, who therefore cannot finne at all, or possibly miscarry though they sinne never so much. Some hold we are justified by Christs passive obedience only, and that for all his active obedience, he might have said, hee was unprofitable as touching mans redemption: Others affirme that not only Christs passive obedience, but his active also, were both necessary to our justification and his owne. To bee briefe, (for volumnes of this nature may recounted.) Some hold the &illegible; of Infants to be obligatory: Others beleeve it may as well, if not better be dispenced withall. Now, there are I say, in the Church of England men that teach all these contradictory doctrines, who yet pretend to have had an expresse calling unto the Ministery from God, extraordinary in respect to their Lay-brethren: They all stile themselves Gods Ambassadours to us, they tell us that Christs words in Luke 10. 16. are as clearly to be understood of them and their successours in their respective generations, as of the 70. Disciples themselves: to wit, He that heareth you, &illegible; me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent &illegible; Thus doth each of them &illegible; the Divinity both of their Ministery and Doctrine upon the people, because it brings in their &illegible; their maintenance, with such execrable threatnings, to those that will not receive them, that they poore soules, having their judgements &illegible; by superstitious feares, cannot choose but swallow them down &illegible; uncasted.

But since their Doctrines doe appeare so contradictory to such as are not hoodwink’d; since no one of them can prove his Ministery to be trust &illegible; the others; nay, since it is agreed on amongst themselves that their Ministery is one and the same, wee cannot with any shew of reason be required to beleeve them otherwise, than all alike, that is, so far forth only as &illegible; &illegible; fully &illegible; thereof in our &illegible; &illegible; Rom. 14. 5. which upon the very first reflection trust needs conclude, that, since the callings and doctrines of them all cannot &illegible; be &illegible; implying contradictions, so cannot the calling of either of &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; they as have the false something, &illegible; is evident by &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible;

But to &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; I have prov’d, were not &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; came into the land of Canaam, &illegible; that end of Tribe of Levi, for particular expresse purposets to wit, besides others, that they should give one tenth thereof for a heave-offering unto the High Priest, Num. 18. 27, 28, 29. who was to sacrifice in the Temple at Jerusalem, and the said Tribe of Levi was to attend and doe the service of the Tabernacle, Num. 3. 7. 8. and was only required to receive either of their brethren the Jewes, the other eleven Tribes which came out of the loynes of Abraham, Heb. 5. 7. and neither they the said Tribe of Levi, nor the High Priest to have any other portion or inheritance besides the tithes, Numb. 18. 20. 23. 24, from whence amongst others, we may draw these few observations.

1. According to the Laviticall law, the tithes of the land of Canaan only were payable, and that in the land of Canaan only, and from the Jewes their brethren only; But these pretended &illegible; lay claime to the tithes of all the world, from all sorts of Nations, to be due unto themselves the Clergy.

2. The Jewish Lavites were a peculiar Tribe, upon whom the tithes were entailed from one generation to another, and by a Statute to endure for ever, they were to have no other inheritance, Numb. 18. 23. but were to rely upon the Lord, who promised to be their portion: But these, who are no more of Lavi his kindred than the Great Turks, allusing unto their wayes, not much unlike the Jesuits, or rather Romulus, such of all Nations who are fittest for their turnes, by tricks and shifts, seducing whom they can, through a pretence of superstitious zeale, lay claime, rob, and run away with the fifth part of all their neighbours goods, wherein, notwithstanding, they have so little trust, and lesse confidence in Gods promise, which was to be a portion unto the Israelitish Lavites, in whom there was no guile; that they lay up, board and purchase, as if they knew their posterity were bastards, and not to bee provided for, neither by tithes, nor Gods providence: And

3. Whereas the true Lavites were to give for a heave-offering unto the High Priest of the family of &illegible; one tenth of all those tithes, our English Lavites, &illegible; their High Priest and head the Pope was banished out of England, pretend to pay (when they cannot avoid it, for they are slow enough in payment) unto the King: I know not what first &illegible; instead thereof, and indeed they made him so far forth their High Priest to beare their &illegible; that what ever they have of &illegible; &illegible; questioned for, they cast upon his back.

I know the common &illegible; and objection which is made against &illegible; maintenance, is wit, that most men are so backward to all good duties, especially in matter of expence, that if they be not both rated and compelled to pay, they will not pay at all, or not their shares proportionably: and that if there be not both a certain &illegible; round allowance, such as have hitherto applyed themselves to study for service of the Church, will grow discouraged-betake themselves to other callings, and by this meanes the Gospell become contemptible, through want of an able and learned Ministery: To this I answer, that it is evident by experience that such Ministers of the Congregationall way as have good parts, and are consciousnable in their callings, although they leave every one of their Congregation to contribute as God has enabled them according to the purpose of their owne hearts, not grudgingly, which was Pauls rule, 2 Cor. 9. 5. I say, that such have a maintenance equall (if not exceeding) to what the tithes produced in the Bishops times, or may doe againe hereafter if they were to be continued. Secondly, for such as will not put themselves to study for the Churches service, unlesse they be encouraged by maintenance; I say, they are guilty of a &illegible; surpassing symony, a namelesse sinne, a sinne so infamous, as none were found in the Gospel-time so vile and desperate to commit it, and give occasion unto a law at once expressely both to name it and condemne it, &illegible; Magus his sin was not so great as theirs, hee would have bought the gifts of the Holy Ghost, these men would sell them if they had them; &illegible; Magus thought so well of the Holy Ghost, that he would have purchased it with money, Act. 8. 18, 19. But these sons of covetousnesse are so basely lordid, that they will not accept of it gratis, unlesse they may, at same time, have a Great, a Monopoly to impose the counterfeit gifts thereof upon the people, at an enhanced, overgrowne excised rate. Thirdly, such men doe plainly by their practise declare to all the world, that there &illegible; no difference between the calling of such backney Ministers, and the calling of a Merchant, Cobler, or any Handicraftman, but that it is indifferent, and all alike, free for every one to betake himselfe to which of them he pleases, and thinkes will prove most gainsome and beneficiall to him: And lastly, &illegible; &illegible; bee the Clergies due by Divine right, &illegible; is determitted by that great &illegible; of the Assembly, Dr. Burges, with sundry &illegible; of the &illegible; &illegible; their are all the Lay-men of England highly guilty of &illegible; who withhold them by &illegible; but if by a meere &illegible; a Parliamentary-law, only they lay claime unto them, then may it the &illegible; be repealed, since it so much intrenches upon the subjects propriety in generall, and upon the most tender consciences of many in particular.

And when they are admonished to labour with their hands from Pauls example, rather then be chargeable unto the people, 1 Thess. 2. 9. they answer, that though Paul did labour, yet it was of his owne good will and curtesie, there was no obligation for it, and seeke to prove it by those words of Pauls, where he sayes, it Cor. 9. 6. have not Paul and &illegible; a power, as well as the other Apostles, to forbeare working? to which I reply, that Paul and &illegible; had the same power to forbeare working, which the brethren had to forbeare giving them maintenance, the one could not be compelled to worke, neither might the other be forced to set me at and drinke before them, or any others, much lesse if they were persons addicted unto idlenesse.

But I presume it will not be pleaded in Pauls behalfe, that he or any body else might lawfully passe their time in idlenesse, especially since &illegible; finde that Pauls expresse command unto the Thessalonians, was, that of any would not &illegible; he should not &illegible; 12 Thess. 3. 10. So neither is it pretended that Christians may lawfully refuse administring to the necessities of their brethren, especially, of such as teach them spirituall things.

2. Paul cannot be said to require any other power of forbearing to worke, then what the other Apostles had, or made use of, and we may not imagine of them, that they were idly given; doubtlesse they omitted no opportunity of imploying their time, as might be most advantagious and edifying unto the brethren, and upon this supposition they were to spend the whole day, even all their dayes, between providing for their owne livelihood, their health, and the propagation of the Gospell; now besides &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; and &illegible; was necessary for keeping them alive, which they must have got by labouring with their owne hands, or else have beene supplyed therewith from the brethren, if the brethren did supply Paul with food and &illegible; then might he have forborne to worke, as he &illegible; 1 &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; he must have spirit so much more time with labouring in the &illegible; and doctrine, a &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; he must not have &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; was said before, but by Pauls practice ’tis evident he might not forbeare &illegible; when his &illegible; maintenance, would have proved &illegible; to the brethren.

But in conclude; Our Saviour &illegible; &illegible; of the Gospel Ministery, lest his Disciples, being ignorant how to demorne themselves, &illegible; goe about to carve their owne maintenence, when hee first sent them out to preach the Gospell, he charges them expressely, saying, freely yet have received, freely give, Matth. 10. 8. then, that they might not rest any wayes perplexed through feare of want, as such who might apprehend themselves altogether unprovided of necessation, he &illegible; them eat such things as were set before them, Luke 10. &illegible; and that they and their successors in the Ministery of the Gospell, might be the better induced to relye upon the same providence ever after, being returned from their Ministery, he askes them, saying. When I sent you without purse and scrip, and shoots, wanted ye any thing and they said, We &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; 22. 35. whereunto I will only adde, that for those who &illegible; &illegible; themselves Ministers, and will not be contented with such wages and maintenance as Christ appointed them, it is more then suspicious that they have no &illegible; nor portion, neither in the Apostles saith, Ministery nor Gospell.

After I had finished this short Discourse, there came unto my hands Mr. Seldom History of Tythes, which I must needs say, I had not scene before, and am confident it will not be ungratefull unto the Reader, if I here present him with some Quotations which I bring from thence, and what I have observed, it a briefe abstract of the History it self.

Quotations.

&illegible; &illegible; complaines of Pope &illegible; &illegible; about 1060. that Introductions or conveyances of perpetuall right of these were granted to Lay-men. l. 1. op. 10. l. 4. op. 12. &illegible; Sold. c. 6.

&illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; Rodulphus &illegible; &illegible;

&illegible; assorted that times were &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; might &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; which was condemned by the &illegible; of &illegible;

&illegible; of &illegible; such as were made &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; Canon Prohibemus of the Councell of Latteran held under &illegible; the 3. &illegible; &illegible; to this day &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; as other Lay-inheritances, although none can now be created in France, &c. Seldon Hist. c. 7.

The Canon law of the Greeke Church never commanded any thing concerning tithes. Id. c. 7.

Theodore Balsamen Patriarch of Antioch advises Mark Patriarch of Alexandria, touching the quantity of what was to be offered in the Easterne Churches, that no certaine quantity is appointed by the Canons, and that through the inequality of mens estates (none of them giving any such part to the Church as that it could discover their abilities) which permits not a regular certainty, they were contented with what custome, and free bounty of the givers bestowed. Respons. 57. inter &illegible; Juris Graco Romani.

Pope Gregory in his answer to Austin the Monke, tells him, that the custome is generally to make a quadripartite division of all Church offerings, or tithes; for the Bishop, for his Clergy, for the poore, and for &illegible; of Churches; but admonishes him that to condernesse of the English-Saxon Church, he and his Clergy should still imitate the Community of all things used in the Primitive times under the Apostles. Selden of Tithes. c. 9.

Differences about Tithes were decided by the Sheriffes and Bishops in the Saxons times, and afterwards made determinable in the Bishops Consistory by William the Conqueror, Id. c. 14. sect. 1. & seq.

Temporall Courts did notwithstanding judge of tithes even untill Henry the seconds time, and in certain cases and manner of proceedings till Henry the thirds time. Id. Ibid. sect. 4. 5. 7.

Epiphanius Bishop of Constance in Cyprus about the yeare 380. writing against certaine her crickes of the Primitive times, speaking of the &illegible; or those which thought that Easter must needs be kept on the 14. Moone according to the Law given the Jesus. concerning the Passeover, fearing that observing of it otherwise might subject them to the curse of the law, sayes, they might as well be lyable to the same curse, for not circumcising, for not paying tithes, for not offering at Jerusalem; which is an undeniable argument that in those dayes, and in those parts, they paid no tithes, no more then they did sacrifice, or circumcise, Id. Revew. of Ch. 4.

Observations.

THe Councells for the first 600. yeares take no notice of tithes, bet of offerings and lands possessed with their Revenues.

All that was received in the Bishopricke or Parish (for both words had but one signification at first) by such as were appointed by the Bishop, was divided into foure parts, whereof one fourth was for maintenance of the Ministery, out of which every Curate had his monthly salary; one fourth to reliefe of the poor, sicke and strangers; one fourth to reparation of Churches, and one fourth to the Bishop of the Diocesse or Parish; but this course was proper to the Diocesse of Rome.

Untill the yeare 800. Lay-men who were Patrons of Churches, shared with their Chaplins, and such Incambents as they put in of all such offerings as were made, as appeares by Councells, and Imperiall Capitularies.

Towards the end of the 400. yeare, some few devouter people began to pay tithes, or rather duties, no proportion being established, for reliefe of the poore, which continued chiefly, if not only for their use, untill about the end of the 800. yeare, at which time they began to be devoted unto Churches, at the sole disposition of the Clergy, not the Parson only, but of some fraternity of Monkes, at the Benefactors choice, yet so that the Doner might appropriate them to what Church he pleased, though it were situate in an other Parish, or pretinct, then where the tithes were to be gathered. That of &illegible; was the first Generall Councell which mentioned tithes about the yeare 1130. and no Canon commanded the payment of tithes, till the &illegible; Generall Councell in the yeare. 1215.

FINIS.

 


8.29. Anon., The World is turned Upside Down (8 April, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Anon., The world is turned upside down. To the tune of, When the King enjoys his own again.

Estimated date of publication

8 April, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 431; Thomason 669. f. 10. (47.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

THE WORLD IS TURNED UPSIDE DOWN.

To the Tune of, When the King enioys his own again.

LIsten to me and you shall hear,

News hath not been this thousand year:

Since Herod, Cæsar, and many more,

You never heard the like before.

Holy-dayes are despis’d,

New fashions are devis’d.

Old Christmas is kickt out of Town.

Yet let’s be content, and the times lament,

You see the world turn’d upside down.

The wise men did rejoyce to see

Our Saviour Christs Nativity:

The Angels did good tidings bring,

The Sheepheards did rejoyce and sing.

Let all honest men,

Take example by them,

Why should we from good Laws be bound?

Yet let’s be content, &c.

Command is given, we must obey,

And quite forget old Christmas day:

Kill a thousand men, or a Town regain,

We will give thanks and praise amain.

The wine pot shall clinke,

We will feast and drinke.

And then strange motions will abound.

Yet let’s be content, &c.

Our Lords and Knights, and Gentry too,

Doe mean old fashions to forgot:

They set a porter at the gate,

That none must enter in thereat.

They count it a sin,

When poor people come in.

Hospitality it selfe is drown’d.

Yet let’s be content, &c.

The serving men doe sit and whine,

And thinke it long ere dinner time:

The Butler’s still out of the way,

Or else my Lady keeps the key,

The poor old cook,

In the larder doth look,

Where is no goodnesse to be found,

Yet let’s be content, &c.

To conclude, I’le tell you news that’s right,

Christmas was kil’d at Nasbie fight:

Charity was slain at that same time,

Jack Tell troth too, a friend of mine,

Likewise then did die,

Rost beef and shred pie,

Pig, Goose and Capon no quarter found.

Yet let’s be content, and the times lament,

You see the world is quite turn’d round.

 


8.30. James Freize, Every mans Right (18 April, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

James Freize, Every mans Right: or, ENGLANDS PERSPECTIVE-GLASSE. Wherein may be seen, every mans Case, Face, Birthright, and just Liberty. Whereunto is added; The Copie of a Letter written by a Prisoner in the Fleet, unto a worthy Member of the House of Commons: Expressing the necessitie of Justice, and the illegality of Imprisonment of men for Debt. Composed (primarily) for the Meridian of London and VVestminster, and may prove very profitable, to inlighten the eyes of all the Commons of England, in this year of our long-expected Reformation, and Suppressions of Injustice, Tyranny, and Oppression, Anno 1646.

Prov. 21.3.7.10.15. The soul of the wicked desireth evill, his neighbour findeth no favour in his eyes. It is joy to the just to do judgement, But destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity. To do justice, and judgement, is more acceptable then sacrifice.

Prov. 24.23, 24. It is not good to have respect of persons in judgement (for) he that sayeth to the wicked, thou art righteous, him shall the people curse, and Nations shall abhorre him.

Prov. 31.8, 9. Therefore open thy mouth wide, in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction; Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.

Eccles. 4.1. So I considered all the oppressions that are done, and behold the Tears of such as be oppressed, and they have no comforter, and on the side of their oppressours there is power, but the oppressed have no comforter.

Job. 24.25. And if it be not so now, who will (or can) make me a Liar, and make my speech nothing worth.

Fear not the face of the mighty, neither be dismayed at the looks of the haughty, for their end shall be suddainly.

Printed, Anno 1646.

Estimated date of publication

18 April, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 433; Thomason E. 340. (2.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Copie of a letter written unto the worthy Member of the Honourable house of Commons, Mr. Henry Martin, Apr. the 18. Anno 1646.

Honoured Sir,

THe many guifts and graces displaying themselves in you, and by them setting forth your zeal to Gods glory, and your Native Countries welfare, together with the hopes of comfort we apprehend in the restoration unto the place you possessed, when the Ordinance of Parliament passed for release of prisoners for debt, and others as unjustly restrained; incourages me to addresse my self unto you, not only in mine own particular, but also, for and in the behalf of all, suffering imprisonment for Debt, in those times in which the whole Kingdome is become Banckrupt; and inforced by a strong hand to work his peace for the restoration of her Liberty, Laws, and Religion in its purity, according to the &illegible; and only rule, The Word of God. Yet we poor creatures, whom the Lord by his just afflicting hand, hath berest of all their estates, through severall crosses and losses by Sea and Land, are still afflicted, imprisoned, and oppressed by those, who doubtlesse in their hearts, conceit themselves wiser then their Creator, and by that their phantastick wisdome, endeavour, by most cruell oppression and tyranny, over their brethren (like to the Alcumist) to extract something out of nothing; viz. Satisfaction of debts out of their Brethren, who have nothing, being berest long before by the just hand of heaven. Onely here is the difference; The Lord after his just judgement inflicted on us, did in mercy suffer us still to enjoy the liberty of our persons, and thereby the future use of our endeavours for subsistence, and the common ayre to breath in; But these most cruel,Mich. 7. 1, 3, 1, 5, 6. mercilesse, unjust, persecuting Nimrods, have not only (by that abominable Statute of Bancrupt) berest us of all the remainder of our Estates, to the very covering of our nakednesse; but also have most cruelly shut us up in their severall prison houses for 8. 10. 20. yeers 30. yeers together, There their blood thirstie Soules (like so many Cainballs) feeding upon our bodies and lives, thinking to extract satisfaction for their debts out of the very ruins of our poore soules and lives, depriving us (in these their soul-destroying houses) of the very ayre, by the Lord alotted in common to every Creature to breath in, where our conditions is farre worse then the fellons case, who commonly within 2. or 3. moneths after their Commitment to prison, are by the Law, either aquitted of their Imprisonment, or by deprivation of life released out of their miserable sufferings; whereas our misery of Imprisonment for Debt, is continued many yeeres, and seldome ends, but by a violent (untimely, or naturall) deprivation of our lives in extreame misery.

Shall we the Inhabitants of England, who professe the true Knowledge, Honour, Love, and feare of God, and the Rule of true Christian Charity. prove more cruel to our Brethren and fellow Members of the same Common Wealth, then Turkes and Pagans, who knowes not God in a saving way, or the unjust judge in the Gospel who cared neither for God nor man, yet because of the poore widdowes uncessant importunity, he did her justice, by granting her just request, (God forbid) farre be it, from this so knowing a nation, to mock God thus, in slighting, and neglecting him their Just and dreadfull God, in these his three chiefest attributes, of Mercy, Judgement, and Justice, in stopping their eares from the hearing lamentable cries, of the oppressed, and becoming dumb to speak in the behalfe of the afflicted, oppressed, and long imprisoned, or to judge their righteous cause in a free current without respect of persons, and yet (with greife of heart be if spoken) our severall uncessant humble requests, have now continued more then Five yeeres, crying, knocking, and calling at the doores of the honourable Assembly of Parliament; for Justice, and Release, from this our unjustly inslaved Thraldome; But hitherto have we reaped no fruits of our humble and just desires; For their faces have been bid, & their eares stopped against the cryes of our afflictions, so that (as yet) none of our oppressions and wrongfull sufferings are redressed (as in duty both to God and Man, they ought long since to have bin) and then doubtlesse our enemies had bin long ere this time at peace with us, & the Land should have injoyed rest; For when the wayes of men please the Lord, then (and not till then) shall their very enemies be at peace with them; For what do I require of thee O man saith the Lord; but to execute Justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God, to relieve the Widdow, the Fatherlesse, and the stranger, and to let the oppressed, and long imprisoned go free; for in these things I delight saith the Lord: But my soule abhoreth the wayes, of wickednesse, Injustice, Tyrannie, and Oppression.

The long neglect of Justice (I think) hath brought downe these heavie Judgements from the just hand of heaven upon this Kingdome in speciall, where God and his Statutes are so cleerly known, but whether they be as truly practised or not, I refer to your Judgement, and to the due consideration of all such as truly love and feare God.

For now ye purpose to keepe under the People of God for Bond men and Bond women unto you; But are there not with, you even with you, sinnes against the Lord your God? And because we have not from the first sought the Lord, after a due order, and in the true practice and faithfull execution of Justice, Judgement, and mercy: Therefore hath the Lord God made this breach upon us, as at this day to the Kingdomes woe.

The neglect of Justice, Judgment, and mercie (and the practise of the contrary by the Israelites) informed the Lord to become an enemy unto them, to swallow them up by his judgments of Plague, Pestilence, Famine, and the Sword, and also to destroy all their strong holds and places of habytation in the Land, and to increase unto &illegible; Mourning, Lamentation, and Woe, and can we, who are guilty of the same transgressions (if not more) being but wild branches of that Olive tree, presume to receive more favours from the hand of that most just God, then those his peculiar chosen people the Israelites? Certainly no, For what measure ye mere unto the poor, afflicted, and oppressed, shall be measured to you again, Oh that there were some just Jehoshaphat, to give some speedy and strict charge, for the due execution of justice, between man and man, in a free current without respect of persons, and without the taking of Fees, Gifts, (alias Bribes) and otherwise stiled New-years gifts. The 2d. of Chron. 19. 5, 6, 7, 9. 10. verses. Or that there were in that honourable Assembly, some undaunted zealous Nehemiah, to stand up for the birth-right and just liberty of his brethren (according to the true intent of his being called to that place of trust) & to inforce justices, take its free current without respect of persons (or the wages of Balaam) in despight of all wicked, abhominable, opposers of the same: Nehem. 5. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. verses. And I wish also from my heart, that the 58, and 59. Chapters of Isaiah, the 58. Psalme, the 6. of Jeremiah, and the 22. of Ezekiel, were truly looked into, piously considered, and well weighed by all the Inhabitants of the Land, from the highest euen to the lowest of them, and that they might open their mouthes in the cause of the oppressed, and such as are appointed (by cruelty and tyranny) for destruction, that they might open their monthes and judge righteousnesse, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.

I will say no more for this present, but onely from my poor oppressed and afflicted soul, most earnestly and uncessantly wish and pray for the prosperity of Sion, and the peace and flourishing state of this Kingdome. Beseeching you also in the bowels of compassion to think upon your afflicted, oppressed, and long-imprisoned Brethren, to cast your eyes upon these inclosed papers; Intituled, An Appeal to Heaven; and the other called, A Declaration and appeal to all the free-born People of England; and then (as the Lord shall direct you) to prove a Moses for our delivery out of this Egyptian bondage of unjust imprisonment, which is the most earnest and humble sute of him who is and will be

From my chamber of close imprisonment
in the Fleet, since the 11 of Febr. 1645.
(contrary to the Subjects liberty, and
the Parliaments own vote, in the case of
Sir Rich, Wiseman and thers, complaining
of their close imprisonment in the
year 1641.) this &illegible; of April, 1646.

Your assured friend in
the Lord, to serve
you in what he may
to his power,

James Frese.

Woe unto that Kingdome and people, where the wicked walke on every side (without controul) and the vilest men are exalted to places of eminencie and trust,Isai. 10. 1, 2, 3, 4. that they may oppresse and do violence with both hands, yea, that they may the more effectually exercise their cruel tyranny of injustice and oppression (without let or hindrance) upon the poore, the needy, the afflicted, oppressed, and long imprisoned, in especiall upon such as honour, love, and feare God, and most earnestly wish the peace and prosperity of this Kingdome, some such as these have been brought to most untimely ends by Jaylor, and their substitutes, others quite lamed by their Iron fetters, others of them have suffered unjustly, most cruel and heavie afflictions in severall prison houses and denns of cruelty, from some (eminently supports) Jaylors, and their cruel substitutes, yet hitherto none of these oppressed Christians have been righted; but rather discouraged from seeking any redresse, their severall Articles exibited against Jaylors, extreamly slighted, and themselves still exposed to the inhumane rage and unlimited crueltie of these Jaylors, and their hellish substitutes, to be by them (if not murthered) yet beaten, abused, reviled daily, and starved to death, and decreppit by Irons, for instance the prisons of the Kings Bench, the Fleete, and Newgate.

Behould they tread upon the poore, they afflict the needy, they murther the innocent, and crush the prisoners under their feet, before the face of the most high, not regarding the Lord of Hosts, nor his Power, nor his Justice, nor his Judgements, although he hath divided them, in setting the Prince against the people, the Father against the Sonne, and one friend against another, and hath set the sword as a destroyer of them all, yet they still provoke the Lord of Hosts, the God of Justice unto wrath and indignation against themselves, by neglecting the due execution of Justice, Judgements and mercy, in a free current (without respect of persons, and the wages of Balaam) &illegible; Fees, Newyeers-gifts, and Bribes: It seemeth &illegible; Riddle, not only to me, but also to many thousands in the Kingdome, that the greatest Contest betweene King and Parliament, being for the Liberty of the subiect (and hath been the cause of so much efusian of Christion blood for almost 5. yeers together) the Peers of the Realme constantly enjoying the same, and yet the commonalty hitherto most unjustly debarred of the same, and still inslaved (as formerly) unto the arbitrary will and power of a few mercinarie Lawyers whose profession and gayne inslaves them to the will and disposition of the very worst and skum of men and women, and ingages them (as hirelings) to maintaine their cause at any barre of justice (so called) for the price of iniquity; I meane for their fee of ten or twenty shillings, be the cause never so bace and unjust, so by them mayntained. It is therefore to be considered, whether it be agreeable to justice, and the freedome and prosperity of this Nation, that the prosperity and flourishing state of a few Lawyers, Atturneys, Jaylours, and their adherents should be preserved before, the just liberty, peace, and well being of this whole Nation and their posterities, and whether it savour of Christianity or any Charity, to inslave your brethren to their works, and unjust wills, & to coope them up (as a bird in a cage) in your prison houses, and not to provide for their subsistence there, or for their determinate time of delivery from thence; but expose them to the oppression of their adversaries, and the severall mercies cruelties of Jaylors and their cruell substitutes for many yeers, or whether the inrichment of a few Lawyers, Atturneys, Solicitors, Clarkes and Jaylors, be to be preferred before the flourishing Peace and tranquility of this whole Nation, and also whether it be according to Gods Law (whose people we professe our selves to be) that justice should not be executed nor administred unto the poore of the Land in particular, nor to all in generall, without the price and reward of iniquity, I meane without paying to Judges, Lawyers, Atturneys, Clarkes, Jaylours, their deputies and servants, their severall great (unjust) exacting Fees, Fees I say, and Newyeers gifts (besides Bribes) for expedition, and setting downe of a sause for hearing, or else it may be staved off by many jugling tricks and devices of our Lawyers from being heard, since the 44th. yeer of Queene Elizabeths Rayne untill this present, especially in the Court of Chancery, where the succeeding Orders (like so many vipers) still &illegible; up and devour all the preceeding Orders, of that Court, and one cause of 40. l. value, produceth at the least 700. severall orders before it be determined, and the expence of that Suite (on the Plaintifs part only) amount unto 2500. l. at the least, these and such like causes (and the severall commitments upon the same) makes Lawyers and Jaylours laugh, and both plantiff and defendant to come heavily home by weeping crosse, to the utter ruin of them and their posterity, and at the last inforces them to sell their Lands to their Lawyers, and Atturneys. We reade that Samuel judged Jsrael many yeeres, yet we reade not, that he nor any of his Servants and subordinate Officers exacted or recived any fees and rewards of the people for the administration of Justice, or that the people were barred from pleading their causes (but only by Lawyers, Advocates, and Atturneys) or that ever there were such a generation of men, or Instruments of contention knowne, or appointed by Gods Law, to the overthrowing of many a poore and righteous mans cause, by their severall tricks and unjust devices tending meerly for their owne ends, and sell-advantage of private gayne, although to the apparent inslaving of the Nation, and ruine of the People.

Who, but some Lawyers, are (for these 5. yeeres past) conceived to be the only obstructors of Magna Charta, in poynt of the Subjects Liberty, and inslaving their persons in their severall prison-houses, notwithstanding the peoples severall Remonstrances, Petitions, Declarations, and appeales unto the honourable houses of Parliament, and Commonalty of the Land, and instead of reliefe, their miseries have been augmented to them, by the crueltie of Jaylors (who are countenanced) and the poore Prisoners complaints, rejected and themselves discouraged from exhibiting any further complaints against them, for Justice and Reliefe? who but Lawyers make merchandise of Justice, and confine the practise of the same, unto the Latine Tongue, and Pedlars French, like unto the Masse Priests, who in like manner confine the Service of God to the Latine Tongue that they may make merchandise of the word of God, and by keeping the people in Ignorance, inforce them (like slaves) to walke by their light, as the Lawyers and Atturneys do by this Nation; For their Tongues devise mischief, working deceitfully, because they love evill more then good, contention more then Peace, and lying, and swearing, more then to speak the truth, because contention, strife, and debate, is the only thing that brings the price of gayne, Riches, Honour, and Presetment unto their Miti of contention and profession.

The Lord in mercy looke upon the deplorable, afflicted, oppressed, and distressed Estate of this distracted Kingdome, and now at the last (after five yeeres expectation) be pleased to open the eyes, and incline the hearts of the honourable Assembly in Parliament, unto the speedy and free execution and administration of Justice, Judgment, and Mercy, in a cleere current without respect of persons, or the wages of Balam, that so the wrath of God may be appeased, his present Judgements diverted, and the poore, afflicted, oppressed, and long imprisoned,Psal. 123. 4. relieved and released, and also inabled to reape the fruits of justice against their oppressours. And the high and honourable Court of Parliament also,Psal. 140. 3. thereby cleerly acquitted of and from the severall blemithes fastued on them (not only in this Kingdome but also in other Countries) for the neglect of the due administration of Justice (according to expectation upon their first Summons and convening) and the restoration of the Commonalty unto their just and ancient Birth-right of Liberty,Psal. 142. 6. according to Magna Charta, and the late Petition of Right, ratified and confirmed by his now Majesty, more then 4. yeers since.

I do also therefore in all humility, most humbly, and earnestly, implore the high and Honourable Assembly, Piously to consider, That the miseries happening to one man, at one time, may redound to another man the next, and that the same divine hand of power which at the first, did cast us downe into the dust of reproach, misery, and oppression, is also able at his pleasure, to bring the mightiest, the richest, yea, the proudest downe to the like dust of misery, and bands of oppression; Beseeching them also to consider, that if any their carses were the same with us, whether, they then would be willing & contented thus to suffer, & to be oppressed by the indirect practise of the Law, and Tyrannie of Jaylors, and their hellish Instruments; To be by them close imprisoned, put in Irons, starved, yea murthered in Goale (I trowe not) yea, I am consident that they would account it a great measure of cruelty inflicted on them, or their posterity; and have not many thousands of ancient families in this Kingdome, (by imprisonment) been brought to utter ruine and destruction, and have not I knowne divers personages, nobly desended of very ancient Families in this Kingdome, that have perished miserably in Goal, and their misery not pittied by any, nor their death no more regarded by the Jaylour, nor any his Substitutes, then the barking of a Dogg. These things piously considered (according to the Rule of Christian Charity) it is then to be wished, that the sacred Rule of our Saviour Christ might speedily be put in practice amongst the Innabitants of this Land; from the highest to the lowest of them. To do as we desire others should &illegible; to us, and not like Camballs, out of meere malice and revenge, (and the great gayne by contention) to devoure one another in prison houses, that so the God of Justice, Love, Mercy, and Peace, may receive us againe to mercy, and returne unto us, with healing in his wings. For behold, wickednesse and oppression shall not deliver those that are given to it,Note this &illegible; And there is a time wherein one man ruleth over another, to his own burs, And because sentence against evill doers is not speedily executed; therefore the hearts of the Sons of Belial is fully set in them to do evill with both hands: For they lye in wayte for blood, they haunt their Brethren with the net of cruelty and oppression. The best of them is as a Briar, or as a Thorny bedge unto his &illegible; afflicted Brother; And if it be not so now, who will make &illegible; a lyer, and make this my speech nothing worth, Jobe 14. 25. For thus saith the Lord, who art them, that &illegible; shouldest be afraid of men that shall die, and the Sons of men which shall be made as Grasse, and forgestest the Lord thy maker, because of the fury of the oppressour, as if he were ready to destroy; Feare not the reproach of men, be not dismald at their lookes, neither be afraid of their revilinge; for the Moth and the Worm shall eat them, horror, confusion, and eternall destruction shall take hold of them. And where (then) is the fury of the oppressour? I am he that comfort thee; for I am a just, and a righteous God, who bring Princes to nothing, and make all the Judges of the Earth as vanity; Therefore fear not man, whose breath is in his Nosthrils, for wherein is he to be accompted of; Behold I the Lord execute Righteousnesse and Judgement, for all that be oppressed; Therefore be not afraid of their faces, nor of their haughty and proud looks, for I am with thee.

Imprisonment may be compared to Hell

Where punishment, among them shall excell,

And Hels musick is, to curse and swear

And ban, their wicked friends, so do they there;

As they in Hell, shall daily howl and cry,

For to obtain some case, or liberty,

So men in prison daily make complaint,

How they with grief and hunger pine and faint,

And are tormented by the Jaylors still

With iron fetters, abused at their will:

Yet these unto Delinquents, Traytors, Papists, Knaves,

Yeild liberty, give moneys, onely make us slaves,

That loyall are, no Enemies to th’ state;

This is our lot, this is our cruell fate,

And fruits we reap for our fidelity,

From these vile &illegible; of all disloyalty,

Who most of them being none other then,

Fiends of hell, walking in shapes of men,

Acting &illegible; pleasure, on us all

That are their captives, lying in Bonds and thrall:

Yet we these five years past, no right can have

Though we the same full oft with tears did crave,

Of King and Parliament to grant, but that

Which they themselves full oft, have sworn flat,

For to maintain, the liberties and right

Of five-born Subjects, and thereto have plight

Their faith, their covenant, and their Protestation,

Yet for all this, we still reap molestation,

Anguish and sorrow, afflicts our hearts and will,

Cruelty of Jaylors, doth torment us still:

If Lawes, if oaths, if vowes, if Protestation,

If covenant with God, produce such reformation,

Then Judges, Lawyers, Atturneys, Jaylors, all

This Kingdomes glory, unto your lot must fall.

Then Bribes and Fees all Hellish gain,

Shall flourish to the peoples pain,

And sorrow grief and misery,

Shall still possesse the Commonalty,

For justice, judgement, and mercy,

Are grounded on true piety,

But want of justice in this land,

Hath brought on all, Gods heavie hand.

Be carefull then, suppresse the Imphes, make sure

Your Rights and Liberties, may still endure

To future ages, posterity then may

Have cause, to blesse your memories for aye:

For God, is God of Unity, of Love, and Peace alone,

But these men for deceit and strife,

the like of them there’s none.

Probatum est.

For whatsoever is not of God is from the Divell. But injustice, contention (and the instruments of the same) Oppression, Bribery, imprisonment of men unjustly, starving, and murthering of men in Goal, are not from God; Therefore from the Divell: And whosoever doth them, doth the will of his father the Divell; for he is a murtherer from the beginning, and the grand Enemy to Justice, Love, Mercy, and Peace. Therefore if we be of God, we must then do the works of God, and manifest the fruits of the same. And these are the works of God; To execute justice and judgement, to shew mercy, to relieve the Widdow, the fatherlesse, and the stranger, and to let the oppressed go free. Let us therefore now at the last (by suppressing of Contention, Injustice, Tyranny, and Oppression, and the wicked instruments of the same; And by a speedy administration of justice, judgement, and mercy) try the Lord our God, and see if the Lord will not forthwith powr down his mercies on us, withdraw his present judgements (of Devision, Sword, and Plague) from us, and heal the Land; and so become a father of mercies, a God of comfort and consolation, unto us, and our posterity after us.

It is to be wished, that the Lawes of England favoured of as much justice and mercy, and were but as truly executed without respect of persons, as the Lawes of some Forraign Nations are, & that there were some honest men appointed, for the Visitation of Prisons every first Munday in the Month, for to restrain the cruelty of Jaylours, and to know the causes of mens Imprisonment; To whom the prisoner declaring himself by Petition, declares the reall value of his estate (and as in the presence of God, affirms the contents of his Petition to be the whole truth) unto which the Commissioners then subscribe. Let the Creditors see this Petition, and by the next Visitation day, either disprove the contents thereof, or else the Petitioner to be set free, upon the assignement of the two third parts of the said declared Estate unto them. In the mean time, the Creditors, or party imprisoning the Debtor, are to take care for his subsistance in Goal, and to discharge all just Prison fees.

And if the Creditor happen to disprove the said Debtors Petition before the said Commissioners, and prove that he hath concealed some part of his estate; then (for a punishment to such a deceiver) his whole estate is, by the said Commissioners assigned to the Creditors, and both he, his wife, and children, deprived of their third part of the same; and the said fraudulent Debtor is then also adjudged to stand in the Pillory (and a hole punched or bored through his ear.) But upon the Debtors discovery of his whole estate (be it more or lesse) really and truly, then the Commissioners do forthwith assigne two third parts of the said estate to the Creditors, and the other part thereof unto the said Debtor, for and towards the future subsistence of himself and his wife, and education of his children: And further, that if any Debtor, do of purpose take up goods & monies, with an intent to defraud (and take a prisoner as his surety) by assigning over in trust the said estate to some of his friends (this being proved) then the said Commissioners have power to assigne all the said estate unto the Creditors, prohibiting (by proclamation) all persons from paying or delivering unto the said cheating Debtor any monies, goods, or Lands, or to any other persons for his use, but only unto the Creditors; And the said Cheator or fraudulent Debtor, is then also adjudged to stand three hours in the Pillory, and to have then both his Nosthrils slit up (by the common Hangman) or some base Hounds-Cut:) Such a course as this, truly and justly put in execution here in England, would soon increase the number of honest men, and produce (if not inforce) honest and plainer dealing, from, and amongst all men, and it would also destroy the great number of Deceivers, Oppressors, Extortioners, and Gentlemen-cheaters, as well as common-Cheaters, and all Knights of the Post, common Bail-men, and all such cunny-catching deceitfull companions. The opening of this gap (I doubt not) will draw upon me, the rage and malice (if not the curse) of all Knights and Gentlemen Jaylours and their Substitutes, as also the revengefull fury of some evill-minded Lawyers, Atturneys, Clarkes, Soliciters, Sergeants, and Bumbayliffes: From whose Milles (by this meanes) the great gainfull waters of contention, fraud, injustice, and oppression, will be dreyned dry, theit deceitfull craft fall to the ground, and their Goddesse Diana quite drowned in the Sea of Englands Peace and Tranquility.

Truth from Injustice, may hap to reap some Blame,

Yet truth shall stand, Injustice shall reap the shame.

FINIS.

Gentle Reader,

I Pray thee to accept of this small Treatise for the present, and if this unjust bondage of Imprisonment, be any longer continued, upon the Commonalty of this Land, then expect a more larger Relation, and Declaration of the many severall oppressions, indirect practises, and abuses of the severall Courts, and Committees, as also of the severall murthers and cruelties, by Jaylors committed on prisoners, when, where, on whom, and by whom; so farre forth as God shall enable me, and give me life and health. In the mean time I remain, thine and the Kingdomes friend and well-wisher, and a professed Enemy to all instruments of Injustice, Tyranny, and Oppression.

For the Lord upholdeth my soul, he, even the God of Justice, Judgement, and Mercy, is on my side, and taketh my part against all those that seek to destroy my soul; Therefore will I not fear what man can do unto me.

Farewell,

This year of Hope, 1646.

 


8.31. John Cotton, The Controversie concerning Liberty of Conscience (9 October, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Cotton, The Controversie concerning Liberty of Conscience in Matters of Religion, Truly stated, and distinctly and plainly handled, By Mr. JOHN COTTON of Boston in New-England. By way of answer to some Arguments to the contrary sent unto him, VVherein you have, against all cavils of turbulent spirits, clearly manifested, wherein liberty of conscience in matters of Religion ought to be permitted, and in what cases it ought not, by the said Mr. COTTON.
London, Printed for Thomas Banks, and are to be sold at his shop in Black-Fryers on the top of Bride-well Staires. 1646.

Estimated date of publication

9 October, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 468; Thomason E. 356. (12.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

Scriptures and Reasons written long since by a witnesse of Iesus Christ close prisoner in Newgate, against persecution in cause of conscience, and sent some while since to Mr. Cotton, by a friend, destreng to be instructed, whether persecution for conscience be not against the Doctrine of Iesus Christ. The Scriptures and Reasons are these, which were alledged against persecution.

1. BEcause Christ commands that the Tares and Wheat (which some understand are those that walke in the truth, and those that walke in lies) should be let alone in the world, and not plucked untill the Harvest, which is the end of the World, Math. 13. 30. 38, &c.

2. Because Christ commandeth Math. 15. 14. that they that are blind (as some interpret led on in falle Religion, and are offended with him for teaching true Religion) should be let alone; referring their punishment to their falling into the ditch.

3. Because Christ reproved his Disciples, Luke 9. 54. who would have had fire come down from Heaven to devoure those Samaritanes which would not receive him, in these words, Ye know not of what spirit ye are of, the &illegible; is not come to destroy mens lives, him to save them.

4. Because Paul the Apostle of our Lord teacheth, 2. Tim. 3. 24. That the servant of the Lord must not strive, but must be gentle towards all men, suffering the evill men, instructing them with &illegible; that are contrary minded &illegible; if, God at any time will give them repentance that they may acknowledge the truth, &illegible; come to amendment out of the &illegible; of the Devill, &c.

5. According to these commandements tho holy Prophets &illegible; that when the Law of Moses (concerning Worship) should cease and Christs Kingdome &illegible; established, Esay 2. 4. Mirah 4. 9. &illegible; that they should break their &illegible; into &illegible; and &illegible; &illegible; into Sithes, And Esay 11. 9. Then shall none hurt or destroy in all the Mountain of my Holinesse, &c. And when he came the same he taught and preached as before, and so did his Disciples after him, for the Weapons of his warfare are not carnall, saith the Apostle, 2 Cor. 10. 4. And he charges his Disciples straitly, that his Disciples should be so far from persecuting those that should not be of their Religion, that when they were persecuted they should pray, (Math. 5.) when they were cursed they should blesse, &c.

And the reason seemes to be because they who now are Tares may hereafter become Wheat; they who now are blind may hereafter see, they that now resist him may hereafter receive him; they that are now in the Devils snare by adversenesse from the truth, may hereafter come to repentance, they who are now persecuters and blaspemers (as Paul was) may in time become faithfull as he did, they that are Idolaters as the Corinthians once were, (1 Cor. 6. 9. may hereafter become true worshippers as they; and they that are now no people of God nor under mercy (as the Saints sometimes were) 1 Pet. 2. 20. may hereafter become the people of God and obtain mercy as they. Some come not till the 11. houre Math. 20. 26. If those that come not till the last houre should be destroyed because they come not at the first, then should they never come but be prevented: Thus for the Argument from Scripture.

But 2. Because this persecution for cause of conscience is against the profession and practises of famous Princes.

First, You may please to consider the Speech of King James, in his Majesties Speech in Parliament, 1609. He saith, It is a sure rule in Divinity, that God never loves to plant his Church by violence and bloodshed. And in his Highnesse Apology, page 4. speaking of such Papists who took the oath, thus: I have good proofe, that I intended no persecution against them for conscience sake, but only desired to be secured for civill obedience, which for conscience sake they are bound to perform. And page 60. speaking of &illegible; (the Arch-Priest) His Majestie saith; It was never my intention to lay any thing to the said Arch-Priests charge (as I have never done to any for cause of conscience.) And in his Highnesse exposition on Revel. 20. printed 1588. and after 1603. His Majestie writeth thus:

Sixtly, The compassing of the Saints and the besieging of the beloved City, declareth unto us a certain note of a false Church; to be persecution, for they come to seeke the faithfull, the faithfull are them that are fought: the wicked are the besiegers, the faithfull are the besieged.

Secondly, The saying of Stephen King of Poland, I am King of men, not of consciences, a Commander of bodies not of soules.

So the King of Bohemia writeth thus: And notwithstanding the successe of later times (wherein sundry opinions have been batched about the subject of Religion) may make one cleerly discerne with his eye, and as it were to touch with his finger, that according to the verity of holy Scriptures, and a Maxime heretofore told and maintained by the ancient Doctors of the Church; That mens consciences ought in no sort to be violated, urged, or constrained. And whensoever men have attempted any thing by this violent course, whether openly or by secret means, the issue hath been pernitions, and the cause of great and wonderfull innovations, in the principallest and mightiest Kingdomes and Countries of all Christendome.

And further his Majestie saith, So that once more we professe before God and the whole World, that from this day forward we are formly resolved not to persecute or molest, or suffer to be persecuted or molested, any person whomsoever for matter of Religion, no not they that professe themselves to be of the Romish Church, neither to trouble nor disturbe them in the exercise of their Religion, so they live conformable to the Lawes of the States, &c.

And for the paactise of this, where is persecution for cause of conscience, except in England and where Popery raignes, and there neither in all places, as appears by France, Poland, and other places, nay it is not practised amongst the Heathens that acknowledge not the true God, as the Turke, Persian, and others.

3. Because persecution for cause of conscience is condemned by the ancient and latter writers, yea even Papists themselves.

Hillary against Auxentius saith thus: The Christian Church doth not persecute but is persecured, and lamentable it is to see the great folly of these times, and to sigh at the foolish opinion of this world, in that men think by humane ayd to helpe God, and neither worldly pompe and power to undertake to defend the Christian Church.

I ask you Bishops what helpe used the Apostles in the preaching of the Gospell? With the aid of what power did they preach Christ and convert the heathen from their Idolatry to God: when they were in prisons, and lay in &illegible; did they praise and give thanks to God, for anie dignities graces and favours, received from the Court? or doe you thinke, that &illegible; went about with regall Attendants, or Kingly Authoritie to gather and establish the Church of Christ? sought he protection from Nero, Vespasian?

The Apostles wrought with their hands for their own maintenance, travelling by land and water from &illegible; to Citie, to preach Christ; yea the more they were forbidden, the more they preached Christ. But now alas humane help must assist and protect the faith, the same against the &illegible; The Church which formerly by inducing miserie and imprisonment, was known to be a true Church, doth now terrifie others by imprisonment, banishment, and miserie, and boasteth that she is highly esteemed of the world, when as the true Church cannot &illegible; be hated of the same.

Tertullian ad. Scapulam, it agreeth both with humane reason, and naturall equitie, that everie man worship God uncompelled, and believe what he will, for it neither &illegible; nor profiteth anie one another mans Religion, and beliefe: neither beseems it anie Religion to compell another to be of their Religion, which willinglie and freely should be imbraced, and not by constraint; for as much as the offerings were required of those that freely and with good wil offered, and not from the contrary.

Ierom. impœni lib. 4. in Jeremiam, Heresie must be cut off with the sword of the Spirit, let us strike through with the arrowes of the Spirit, all Sons and Disciples of misled Hereticks: that is, with testimonies of holy Scriptures, the slaughter of Hereticks is by the Word of God.

Brentius upon 1 Cor. 3. No man hath power to make or give Lawes to Christians, whereby to bind their consciences, for willingly, freely, and uncompelled, with a readie desire and cheerfull mind, must those that come run unto Christ.

Luther in his Book of the Civill Magistrate saith, the Laws of the Civill Magistrates government extends no further then over the body or goods, and to that which is externall, for ever the soul God will not suffer anie to rule, onely he himself will rule there. Wherefore whosoever doth undertake to give Lawes to the Soules and Consciences of men, hee usurpeth the Government himselfe, which appertaines unto God, &c. Therefore upon 1. Kings 5. In the building of the Temple, there was no sound of Iron heard, to signifie that Christ will have in his Church a free and a willing people, not compelled and constrained by Lawes and Statutes.

Again he saith upon Luke 22. It is not the true Catholique Church which is defended by the secular arme, or humane power, but the false and fained Church, which although it carries the name of a Church, yet it denies the power thereof.

Again upon Psal. 17. he saith, for the true Church of Christ, knoweth not Brachium seculare, which the Bishops now a daies chiefly use. Again, in Postil. Dom. 1. post. Epiph. he saith: Let not Christians be commanded, but exhorted; For he that willingly will not do that, whereunto he is friendly exhorted, he is no Christian, wherefore they that compell those that are not willing, shew thereby that they are not Christian preachers, but wordly Beadles.

So upon 1 Pet. 3. he saith, if the civill Magistrate shall command me thus and thus: I should answer him after this manner. Lord, or Sir, Look you to your wordly or civill government, your power extends not so far as to command any thing in Gods Kingdome. Therefore herein I may not hear you: For if you cannot bear it, that any should usurpe authority where you have to command, how do you think that God should suffer you to thrust him from his seat, and to seat your selfe therein?

Lastly, the Papists the inventers of persecution in a wicked book of theirs for forth in King James his raigne, thus; Moreover the means which Almighty God appointed his Officers to use in the conversions of Kingdoms and Nations and people, was humility, patience, charity, saying; Behold I send you as Sheep in the midst of Wolves, Math. 10. 16, he did not say, behold I send you as Wolves among, sheep, to kill, imprison, spoile and devoure those unto whom they were &illegible;

Again, vers. 7. he saith, They to whom I send you will deliver you unto Councell, and in their Synagogues they will scourge you, and to presidents, and to Kings, shall &illegible; be led for my sake: He doth not &illegible; You whom I send shall deliver the people (whom you ought to convert) to Councells, and put them in prisons, and lead them to presidents and Tribunall seates, and make their Religion Fellony and Treason.

Again, he saith, ver. 32. when ye enter into a house, salute it, saying; Peace be unto this house, he doth not say you shall send Pursevants to ransack or spoile his house.

Again he said Iohn 10. The good Pastor giveth his life for his sheep, the Theese commeth not but to steale, kill and destroy, he doth not say, the theese giveth his life for his sheep, and the good Pastor commeth not but to steale, kill and destroy.

So that we holding our peace, our adversaries themselves speak for us, or rather for the truth.

But it is objected, that it would be a prejudice to the Common-wealth, to permit liberty of conscience.

We answer, it is not any prejudice to the Common-wealth if liberty of conscience were suffered to such as feare God indeed, as is or will be manifest. Abraham abode among the Cananites a long time, yet contrary to them in matters of Religion, Gen. 13. 7. and 16. 13. Again, he sojourned in Gerar and King Abimelech gave him leave to abide in his Land, Gen. 20. 21. 22. Isaac dwelt in the same land, yet contrary in Religion, Gen. 26. Jacob lived 20. years in one house with his Uncle Laban, yet different in Religion, Gen. 31. The people of Israel were about 430 years in that infamous Land of Ægypt, and afterwards 70. years in Babilon, all which time they differed in Religion from the States, Exod. 22. and 2 Chron. 36. Come to the time of Christ where Israel was under the Romanes, where lived divers Sects of Religion, as Herodians, Scribes, and Pharises, Saduces, and Libertines, Thudeans, and Samaritans, besides the common Religion of the Jewes, Christ and the Apostles. All which differed from the common Religion of the State, which was like the worship of Diana, which almost the whole world worshipped, Acts 19. 20.

All these lived under the government of Cæsar, being nothing hurtfull to the Common-wealth, giving unto Cæsar the things that are his: And for their Religion and consciences towards God, he left them to themselves, as having no Dominion over their soules and consciences. And when the enemies of the truth raised up tumults, the wisdome of the Magistrate most wisely appeased them, Acts. 18. 14. and 19. 35.

The Answer of Mr. John Cotton of Boston or New England to the aforesaid Arguments against persecution for cause of conscience.

THe question which you put is, whether persecution for cause of conscience be not against the doctrine of Jesus Christ the King of Kings.

Now by persecution for cause of conscience, I conceive you mean either for professing some point of doctrine, which you believe in conscience to be a truth, or for practising some work which in conscience you believe to be a Religions duty.

Now in points of Doctrine some are fundamentall, without right beliefe whereof a man cannot be saved; others are circumstantiall or lesse principall, wherein men may differ in judgment without prejudice of salvation on either part. In like fort, in points of practise, some concern the weightier duties of the Law, as, what God we worship, and with what kind of worship; whether such, as if it be right, Fellowship with God is held; if corrupt, Fellowship with him is lost.

Again, in points of Doctrine and Worship lesse principall, either they are held forth in a meek and peaceable way, though the thing be erroneous or unlawfull, or they are held forth with such arrogance and impetuousnesse, as &illegible; and reacheth (even of it selfe) to the disturbance of civill peace.

Finally, let me add this one distinction more; when we are persecuted for conscience sake, it is either for conscience rightly informed, or for erronious and blind conscience. These things premised, I would by down my answer to the question in certain conclusions.

First, It is not lawfull to persecute any for conscience sake rightly informed, for in persecuting such, Christ himselfe is persecuted in them, Acts 9. 4.

Secondly, for an erroneous and blind conscience, (even in fundamentall and weighty points) it is not lawfull to persecute any, untill after admonition once or twice, and so the Apostle directeth, Time 3. 10 and giveth the reason, that in fundamentall and principall points of Doctrine, or Worship, the Word of God is so clear, that he cannot but be convinced in conscience of the dangerous error of his way, after once and twice admonition wisely and faithfully dispensed. And then if any one persist it is &illegible; out of conscience but against his conscience, as the Apostle saith Ver. 11. he is subverted and &illegible; being condemned of himselfe, viz. of his own conscience: So that if such a man after such admonition, shall still persist in the errour of his way, and be therfore punished, he is not persecuted for cause of conscience, but for sinning against his own conscience.

Thirdly, in things of lesser moment, whether points of Doctrine or Worship, if a man hold them forth in a spirit of Christian meeknesse and love (though with &illegible; and constancy) he is not to be persecuted, but tolerated, till God may be pleased to manifest his truth to him, Phil. 3. 17. Rom. 14. 1, 2, 3, 4.

Fourthly, but if a man hold forth, or professe anie errour, or false way, with a boisterous and arrogant spirit, to the disturbance of civill peace, he may justly be punished according to the qualitie and No Puntuation, of his disturbance caused by him.

Now let us consider of your reasons or objections to the contrary.

1. Object. Your first head of Objections is taken from the &illegible; because Christ commandeth to let alone the tares and wheat to grow together till the harvest, Mat. 13. 30. &c.

Answ. Tares are not briars and thorns, but partly hypocrites, like unto the godly, but indeed carnall, as the tares are like the wheat, but are not wheat: or partly such corrupt doctrines or practises as are indeed unfound, but yet such as come very near the truth, (as tares do to the wheat) and so near that good men may be taken with them, and so the persons in whom they grow, cannot be rooted out, but good will be rooted up with them. And in such a case Christ calleth for toleration, not for penall prosecution, according to the third conclusion.

2. Object. In Mat. 15. 4. Christ commandeth his Disciples to let the blind alone till they fall into the ditch, therefore he would have their punishment deferred till their finall destruction.

Answ. He there speaketh not to publike Officers, whether in Church or Common-wealth, but to his private Disciples, concerning the Pharisees, over whom they had no power: And the command he giveth to let them alone, is spoken in regard of troubling themselves, or regarding the offence which they took at the wholsome Doctrine of the Gospel; as who should say, though they be offended at this saying of mine, yet do not you feare their feare, nor be troubled, at their offence which they take at my Doctrine, not out of sound judgement, but out of their blindness. But this maketh nothing to the matter in hand.

3. Object. In Luk. 9. 54. Christ reproveth his Disciples, who would have had fire come down from heaven, to consume the Samaritans, who refused to receive him.

And Paul teacheth Timothy, not to strive, but to be gentle towards all men, suffering evill patienly.

Answ. Both these are directions to Ministers of the Gospel, how to deal (not with obstinate offenders in the Church that sin against conscience, but) either with men without, as the Samaritans were, and manie unconverted Christians in Creet, whom Titus (as an Evangelist) was to seek to convert, or at best with some Jewes or Gentiles in the Church, who though carnall, yet were not convinced of the error of their way: And it is true, it became not the Spirit of the Gospell to convert Aliens, to the saith of Christ (such as the Samaritans were) by fire and brimstone, nor to deale harshly in publike Ministrie, or private conference with all such contrarie-minded men, as either had not entred into Church-fellowship, or if they had yet did hitherto sin of ignorance, not against conscience: But neither of both these do hinder the Ministers of the Gospell to proceed in a Church-way against Church-members, when they become scandalous offenders, either in life or doctrine, much lesse do they speak at all of the civil Magistrates.

4. Object. From the prediction of the Prophets who fore-told, that carnall weapons should cease in the daies of the Gospell, Esa. 2. 4. & 11. 9. Micah 4. 3, 4. And the Apostle professeth, the weapons of our warfare are not carnall, 2 Cor. 10. 4. and Christ is so far from persecuting those that would not be of his Religion, that he chargeth his Disciples when they are persecuted themselves they should pray, when they are cursed they should blesse: the reason whereof, seemed to be, that they who are now persecuters, and wicked persecutors, may become true Disciples and converts.

Answ. Those predictions in the Prophets do only shew, first with what kind of weapons he will subdue the Nations, to the obedience of the faith of the Gospel, not by fire and sword, and weapons of war, but by the power of the Word and Spirit, which no man doubteth of. Secondly, those predictions of the Prophets, shew what the meek and peaceable temper will be of all the true converts to christianity, not Lions, or Leapords, &c. not cruell oppressors, nor malignant opposers, or biters of one another: but doth not forbid to drive ravenous wolves from the sheepfold, and to restrain them devouring the sheep of Christ.

And when Paul saith, the weapons of our warfare are not carnall, &illegible; spirituall, he denieth not civill weapons of Justice to the civill Magistrate, but only to Church-Officers: and yet the weapons of such Ofcers he acknowledgeth to be such, as though they be spiritually, yet are ready to take vengeance of all disobedience, 2. Cor. 10. 6. which hath reference (amongst other Ordinances) to the censure of the Church against scandalous offenders.

When Christ commandeth his Disciples to blesse them that curse them, and persecute them, he giveth not a rule to publike Officers either in Church or Common-wealth, to suffer notorious sinners either in life or doctrine, to passe away with a blessing, but to private Christians to suffer persecution patiently, yea and to pray for their persecutors.

Againe, Christ it is true, would have his Disciples to be farre from persecuting (for that is a sinfull oppression of men) for righteousnesse sake, but that hindreth not, but that he would have them execute upon all disobedience the judgment and vengeance required in the Word, 2 Cor. 10. 6. Rom. 12. 4. Fourthly, though it be true that wicked persons now may by the grace of God, become true Disciples, and Converts, yet we may not do evill, that good may come thereof, and evill it would be to tolerate notorious evill doers, whether seducing teachers, or scandalous livers. Christ had somthing against the Angell of the Church of Pergamus, for tolerating them that held the Doctrine of Balaam, and against the Church of Thiatira, for tolerating &illegible; to teach and seduce, Rev. 2. 14, 20.

Your second head of reasons is taken from the profession and practise of famous Princes, King James, Stephen of Poland, King of Bohemia. Whereunto a treble Answer may briefly be returned.

1. We willingly acknowledge that none is to be persecuted at all, no more then they may be oppressed for righteousnesse sake.

Againe, we acknowledge that none is to be punished for his conscience, though mis-informed as hath been said, unlesse his errour be fundamentall, or sediciasly and turbulently promoted, and that after due conviction of conscience, that it may appear he is not punished for his conscience, but for sinning against his conscience.

Furthermore, we acknowledge none to be constrained to believe or professe the true Religion till he be convinced in judgement of the truth of it; but yet restrained he may from blaspheming the truth, and from seducing any into pernicious errors.

2. We answer, what Princes professe and practise, is not a rule of conscience, they many times tolerate that in point of State policy, which cannot be justly tolerated in point of true christianity.

Againe, Princes many times tolerate offenders out of very necessity, when the offenders are too many or too mighty for them to punish; in which respect David tolerated Joab and his murthers, but against his will.

3. We answer, that for those three Princes named by you, who tolerated Religion, we can name you more and greater, who have not tolerated Hereticks and Schismaticks, notwithstanding their pretence of conscience: For example, Constantine the great, at the request of the generall Councell of Nice, banished Arrius with some of his fellowes, Sozom. lib. 1. Eccles. Hist. cap., 29. 20. The same Constantine made a severe law against the Donatists, and the like proceedings were used against them by Valentinian, Gratian and Theodosius, as Augustine reporteth in Epist. 166. onely Iulian the Apostate granted libertie to Hereticks, as well as unto Pagans, that he might by tolerating all weeds to grow, choak the vitalls of Christianity, which was also the practise and sin of Valens the Arrian.

Queen Elizabeth as famous for Government as anie of the former, it is well knowne what Lawes she made, and executed against Papists: yea and King Iames (one of your owne witnesses) though he was slow in proceeding against Papists (as you say) for conscience sake, yet you are not ignorant how severely and sharply he punished those whom the malignant world calls puritans, men of more conscience and beeser faith, then he tolerated.

I come now to your third and last argument taken from the judgment of ancient writers, yea even of Papists themselves, who have condemned persecution for conscience sake.

You begin with Hilary, whose testimony we might admit without my prejudice to the truth: for it is true the Christian Church doth not persecute, but is persecuted, but to excommunicate a Heretique is not to persecute, that is not to punish an innocent, but a &illegible; and damnable person, and that not for conscience, but for persisting is error against light of conscience whereof it hath been convinced.

It is true also what he saith, that the Apostles did, neither may we propagate Christian Religion by the Sword, but if Pagans cannot be won by the Word, they are not to be compelled by the Sword: Neverthelesse this hindreth not, but that if they or any other should blaspheme the true God and his true Religion, they ought not to be severely punished, and no lesse do they deserve who seduce from the truth to damnable Heresie or Idolatrie.

Your next writer, (which is Tertullian) speaketh to the same purpose in the place alledged by you, his intent was only to restrain Scapula the Romane Governor of Affrica from the persecution of Christians, for not offering sacrifice to their Gods; and for that end fetcheth an Argument from naturall equity, not to compell any to any Religion, but to permit them either to believe willingly, or not to believe at all; which we acknowledge and accordingly permit the Indians to continue in their unbeliefe: Neverthelesse it will not therefore be lawfull openly to tollerate the worship of Devils or Idols; or the seduction of any from the truth.

When Tertullian saith anothers mans Religion neither hurteth nor profitteth any: It must be understood of private worship, and Religion professed in private, otherwise a false Religion professed by the Members of a Church, or by such as have given their names to Christ, will be the ruine and desolation of the Church, as appeareth by the threats of Christ to the Churches of Asia, Rev. 2.

Your next Author Jerome crosseth not the truth, nor advantageth not your cause, for we grant what he saith, that heresie must be cut off with the sword of the spirit: But this hindreth not but that being so cut down, if the Heretique will still persist in his heresie to the seducing of others, he may be cut off by the civill sword, to prevent the perdition of others. And that to be Jeromes meaning appears by his note upon that of the Apostle [a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe] therefore saith he, a sparke assoone as it appeareth, is to be extinguished, and the leaven to be removed from the rest of the dough, rotten pieces of flesh are to be cut off, and a scabbed beast is to be driven from the sheep-fold, least the whole house, masse of dough, body and flock, be set on fire with the sparke, be sowred with the leaven, be &illegible; with the rotten flesh, perish with the scabbed beast.

Brentius (whom you quote next) speaketh not to your cause, we willingly grant him and you, that man hath no power to make Lawe to bind the conscience; but this hindreth not, but that men may see the Lawes of God observed, which do bind conscience.

The like answer may be returned to Luther, whom you next alledge.

First, The government of the civill Magistrate reacheth no further then over the bodies and goods of their subjects, not over their soules, and therefore they may not undertake to give lawes to the soules and consciences of men.

Secondly, That the Church of Christ doth not use the Arms of secular power to compell men to the faith, or profession of the truth, for this is to be done by spirituall weapons, whereby Christians are to be exhorted, not compelled. But this hindreth not that Christians sinning against light of faith and conscience, may justly be censured by the Church by excommunication, and by the civill sword also, in case they shall corrupt others to the perdition of their soules.

As for the testimony of the Popish book, we weigh it not, as knowing (whatsoever they speak for toleration of Religion, where themselves are under the hatches) when they come to sit at Sterne, they judge and practise quite contrary, as both their writing and judiciall proceedings have testified to the world these many years.

To shut up this Argument from testimony of writers; It is well known, that Augustine retracted this opinion of yours, which in his younger times he had held, but after in riper age reversed and refuted, as appears in his second book of retractations, cap. 5. and in his Epistles &illegible; &illegible; and in his first book against Parmenianus, cap. 17. he sheweth that if the Donatists were punished with death, they were justly punished, and in his 11. Tractate upon John, they murther saith he soules, and themselves are afflicted in body, they put men to everlasting death, and yet they complain when themselves are put to suffer temporall death.

Optatus in his third book, justifieth Macharius, who had put some Heretiques to death, that he had done do more herein, then what Moses, Phineas, and Elias had done before him.

Bernard in his 66. Sermon in Cantica, out of doubt (saith he) it is better they should be restrained by the sword of him who beareth not the sword in vain, then that they should be suffered to draw many others into their error, for he is the Minister of God for wrath to every evill doer.

Calvins judgment is well known, who procured the death of Michaell Servetus for pertinacie in heresie, and defended his fact by book written of that Argument.

Beza also a writ a book de Hæreticis morte plectendis, that Heretiques are to be punished with death, Arelius likewise took the like course about the death of Valentius Gentilis, and justified the Magistrates proceeding against him, in a history written of that Argument.

Finally, you come to answer an objection, that it is no prejudice to the Common-wealth if liberty of conscience were suffered to such as fear God indeed, which you prove by the example of the &illegible; and others.

But we readily grant you, liberty of conscience is to be granted to men that fear God indeed, as knowing they will not persist in &illegible; or turbulent schisme, when they are convinced in conscience of the sinfulnesse thereof.

But the question is whether an Heretique after once or twice admonition (and so after conviction) or any other scandalous or &illegible; offender, may be tollerated either in the Church without excommunication, or in the Common-wealth, without such punishment it may preserve others, from dangerous and damnable infection.

Thus much I thought needfull to be spoken, for avoiding the grounds of your Errour.

I forbear adding reasons to justify the contrary, because you &illegible; find that done to your hand, in a Treatise sent to some of the brethen late of Salem, who doubted as you doe.

The Lord Jesus lead you by a spirit of truth in all truth.

John Cotton.

FINIS.

 


8.32. Richard Overton, An Arrow against all Tyrants and Tyranny (12 October, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

Richard Overton, AN ARROW AGAINST ALL TYRANTS And Tyrany, shot from the Prison of New-gate into the Prerogative Bowels of the Arbitrary House of Lords· and all other Usurpers and Tyrants Whatsoever. Wherein the originall rise, extent, and end of Magisteriall power, the naturall and Nationall rights, freedomes and properties of Mankind are discovered, and undeniably maintained; the late oppressions and incroachments of the Lords over the Commons legally (by the fundamentall Lawes and Statutes of this Realme, as also by a memorable Extract out of the Records of the Tower of London) condemned; The late Presbyterian Ordinance (invented and contrived by the Divaners, and by the motion of Mr. Bacon and Mr. Taet read in the House of Commons) examined, refuted, and exploaded, as most inhumaine, tyranicall and Barbarous. By RICHARD OVERTON Prerogative Archer to the Arbitrary House of Lords, Their Prisoner in New gate, for the just and legall properties, rights and freedoms of the Commons of England: Sent by way of a Letter from him, to Mr. Henry Martin, a Member of the House of Commons. IMPRIMATUR Rectat Justitia.
Printed at the backside of the Cyclopian Mountains, by Martin Claw-Clergy, Printer to the reverend Assembly of Divines, and are to be sould at the signe of the Subjects Liberty, right opposite to persecuting Court. 1646.

Estimated date of publication

12 October, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 469; Thomason E. 356. (14.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

AN ARROVV AGAINST ALL TYRANTS And Tyrany, shot from the prison of New-gate into the Prerogative bowels of the Arbitrary House of Lords, and all other Usurpers and Tyrants whatsoever.

Sir,

TO every Individuall in nature, is given an individuall property by nature, not to be invaded or usurped by any: for every one as he is himselfe, so he hath a selfe propriety, else could he not be himselfe, and on this no second may presume to deprive any of, without manifest violation and affront to the very principles of nature, and of the Rules of equity and justice between man and man; mine and thine cannot be, except this be: No man hath power over my rights and liberties, and I over no mans; I may be but an Individuall, enjoy my selfe and my selfe propriety, and may write my selfe no more then my selfe, or presume any further; if I doe, I am an encroacher & an invader upon an other mans Right, to which I have no Right. For by naturall birth, all men are equally and alike borne to like propriety, liberty and freedome, and as we are delivered of God by the hand of nature into this world, every one with a naturall, innate freedome and propriety (as it were writ in the table of every mans heart, never to be obliterated) even so are we to live, every one equally and alike to enjoy his Birth-right and priviledge; even all whereof God by nature hath made him free.

And this by nature every one desires times at, and requires, for no man naturally would be besooled of his liberty by his neighbours craft, or inslaved by his neighbours might, for it is natures instinct to preserve it selfe, from all things hurtfull and obnoctions, and this in nature is granted of all to be most reasonable, equall and just; not to be rooted out of the kind, even of equall duration with the creature: And from this fountain or root, all just humain powers take their original; not immediately from God (as Kings usually plead their prerogative) but mediatly by the hand of nature, as from the represented to the representors; for originally; God hath implanted them in the creature, and from the creature those powers immediately proceed; and no further: and no more may be communicated then stands for the better being, weale, or safety thereof: and this is mans prerogative and no further, so much and no more may be given or received thereof: even so much as is conducent to a better being, more safety and freedome, and no more; he that gives more, sins against his owne &illegible; and he that takes more, is a Theise and Robber to his kind: Every man by nature being a King, Priest and Prophet in his owne naturall circuite and compasse, whereof no second may partake, but by deputation, commission, and free consent from him, whose naturall right and freedome it is.

And thus Sir, and no otherwise are you instated into your soveraign capacity, for the free people of this Nation, for their better being, discipline, government, propriety and safety, have each of them communicated so much unto you (their Chosen Ones) of their naturall rights and powers, that you might thereby become their absolute Commissioners, and lawfull Deputies, but no more; and that by contraction of those their severall Individuall Communications conser’d upon, and united in you, you alone might become their own naturall proper, soveraign power, therewith singly and only impowred for their severall weales, safeties and freedomes, and no otherwise: for as by nature, no man may abuse, beat, torment, or afflict himselfe, so by nature, no man may give that power to an other, seeing he may not doe it himselfe, for no more can be communicated from the generall then is included in the particulars, whereof the generall is compounded.

So that such so deputed, are to the Generall no otherwise, then as a Schoole-master to a particular, to this or that mans familie, for as such an ones Mastership, ordering and regulating power, is but by deputation, and that ad bene placitum, and may be removed at the parents or Head masters pleasure, upon neglect or abuse thereof, and be conser’d upon another (no parents ever giving such an absolute unlimited power to such over their children, as to doe to them as they list, and not to be retracted, controuled, or restrained in their exotbitances) Even so and no otherwise is it, with you our Deputies in respect of the Generall, it is in vaine for you to thinke you have power over us, to save us or destroy us at your pleasure, to doe with us as you list, be it for our weale, or be it for our wo, and not to be enjoyned in mercy to the one, or questioned in justice for the other, for the edge of your own arguments against the King in this kind, may be turned upon your selves, for if for the salety of the people, he might in equity be opposed by you in his tyranies oppressions & cruelties, even so may you by the same rule of right reason, be opposed by the people in generall, in the like cases of distruction and ruine by you upon them, for the safety of the people is the Soveraigne Law, to which all must become subject, and for the which all powers humaine are ordained by them, for tyrany, oppression and cruelty whatsoever, and in whomsoever, is in it selfe unnaturall, illegall, yea absolutly anti magisteriall, for it is even destructive to all humaine civill society, and therefore resistable.

Now Sir the Commons of this Nation, having impowred their Body Representative, wherof you are one, with their own absolute Soveraignty, thereby Authoritively and legally to remove from amongst them all oppressions and tyranies, oppressors and tyrants, how great soever in name, place or dignity, and to protect, safegard, and desend them from all such unnaturall monsters, vipers and pests, bred of corruption or which are intrusted amongst them & as much as in them lies, to prevent all such for the future. And to that end, you have been assisted with our lives and fortunes, most liberally and freely, with most victorious and happy successe, whereby your Armes are strengthned with our might, that now you may make us all happy within the confines of this Nation, if you please; and therfore Sir, in reason, equity and justice, we deserve no lesse at your hands, and (Sir) let it not seem strange unto you, that we are thus bold with you for our own.

For by nature we are the sons of Adam, and from him have legitimatly derived a naturall propriety, right and freedome, which only we require, and how in equity you can deny us, we cannot see; It is but the just rights and prerogative of mankind (whereunto the people of England, are heires apparent as well as other Nations) which we desire: and sure you will not deny it us, that we may be men, and live like men; if you doe it will be as little safe for your selfes and posterity, as for us and our posterity, for Sir, look what bondage, thraldome, or tyrany soever you settle upon us, you certainly, or your posterity will tast of the dregs: if by your present policy and (abused) might, you chance toward it from your selves in particular, yet your posterity doe what you can, will be liable to the hazard thereof.

And therefore Sir, we desire you help for your own sakes, as well as for our selves, chiefly for the removall of two most insufferable evils, daylie encroaching and encreasing upon us, portending and threatning inevitable destruction, and confusion of your selves, of us, and of all our posterities, namely, the encroachments and usurpations of the House of LORDS, over the Commons liberties, and freedomes, together with the barberons, inhumaine, blood-thirsty desires and endevours of of the Presbyterian Clergy.

For the first, namely, the exhorbitances of the LORDS, they are to such an hight aspired that contrary to all presidents the free Comoners of England are imprisoned, fined & condemned by them (their incomputent illegall, unequall, improper judges) against the expresse letter of Magna char. chap. 29. (so often urged and used) that no free man of England shall be passed upon, tryed, or condemned, but by the lawfull judgement of his equals, or by the Law of the Land, wth as saith Sir Edw. Cooke in his exposition of Mag. chap. 28. last li. is Per pares, by his peeres, that is, by his equals. And page 46. branch 1. 2. 5. in these words;

1. That no man be taken or imprisoned, but per legem terræ, that is, by the common Law, Statute Law or custome of England: For these words, per legem terræ being towards the end of this chapter, doe referre to all the pretended matters in this chapter, and this hath the first place, because the liberty of a mans person is more precious to him then all the rest that follow, and therefore it is great reason, that he should by law be relieved therein, if he be wronged, as hereafter shall be shemed.

2. No man shall be disscised, that is, put out of seison, or dispossessed of his free-hold, that is, lands or livelyhood, or if his liberties or free customes, that is, of such franchises and freedomes, and free customes, as belong to him by his free birthright; unlesse it be by the lawfull judgement, that is verdict of his equals (that is of men of his own condition) or by the Law of the Land (that is to speak it once for all) by the doe course and processes of Law.

3. No man shall be in any sorts destroyer (destrucre, 1. quod prius structum & sactum suit; ponitus evertere & dimere) unlesse it be by the verdict of his equals, or according to the Law of the land.

And chapter 19. of Magna Charta, it is said secundum legem & &illegible; Anglia, after the Law and custome of England, non Regis Anglia, not of the King of England, left it might be thought to bind the King only, &illegible; populi Anglia, nor of the People of England, but that the Law might tend to all, it is said, per legem terræ, by the Law of the Land. Magna chapta, 29.

Against this ancient and fundamentall Law, and in the very face thereof (saith Sir Edward Cooks) he found an Act of the Parliament made in the 11. of Hen. the 7. chap. 3. that as well justices of Peace without any finding or presentment by the verdict of 12. men, upon the bare information for the King before them, should have full power and authority, by their discretions to hear and determine all offences and contempts committed or done by any person or persons against the forme, ordinance, and effect of any Statute made and not repealed: by colour of which Act, shaking this fundamentall Law, (it is not credible) saith he what horrible oppressions and exactions (to the undoing of infinite numbers of people) were committed by Sir Richard Empson Knight, and Edmund Dudly, being Justices of the Peace through England, and upon this unjust and injurious act, (as commonly in the like cases it salleth out) a new Office was errected, and they made masters of the Kings Forfitures.

But at the Parliament holden in the 1. of Hen. 8. chap. 6. this Act of Hen. 7. is receited, made void and Repealed, and the reason thereof is yeelded, for that by force of the said Act, it was manifestly known that many sinister, crasty, and forged informations had been pursued against divers of the Kings Subjects, to their great damage and unspeakable vexation: (a thing most frequent and usuall at this day and in these times) the ill successe whereof, together with the most fearfull end of these great Oppressors should deterre others from committing the like, and should admonish Parliaments in the future, that in stead of this ordinary and precious try all Per legem Terræ they bring not in an absolute and parciall try all by discretion, Cooks 2. institute folio. 51.

And to this and the Judgement upon Symondde &illegible;, a Commoner, in the 4. yeare of Edw. 3. is an excellent precident for these times (as is to be seen upon record in the Tower, in the second Roll of Parliament held the same yeare of the said King, and delivered into the Chancery by Henry de Edenston Clerk of the Parliament) for that the said Simon de Bereford having counselled, aided and assisted Roger de Mortimer to the murther of the Father of the said King; the King commanded the Earles and Barons in the said Parliament Assembled, to give right and lawfull judgement unto the said Symon de Bereford; But the Earles, Barons and Peers came before the Lord the King in the same Parliament, and said with one voice; that the aforesaid Simon, was not their Peer or equall, wherefore, they were not bound to judge him as a Peer of the Land: Yet notwithstanding all this, the Earles, Barons and Peers (being over swaid by the King) did award and adjudge (as judges of Parliament, by the assent of the King in the said Parliament) that the said Simon as a traitor & enemy of the Realm, should be hanged & drawn, and execution accordingly was done: But as by the said Roll appeareth, it was by full Parliament condemned and adjudged as illegall, and as a precident not to be drawn into example; the words of the said Roll are these, viz.

And it is assented and agreed by our Lord the King, and all the Grandees in full Parliament, that albeit the said Peers as judges in full Parliament took upon them in presence of our Lord the King, to make and give the said Judgement by the assent of the King, upon some of them that were not their Peers, (to wit Commoners) & by reason of the murther of the Leige Lord, and destruction of him, which was soneer of the blood royall and the Kings Father, that therefore the said Peers which now are, or the Peers which shall be for the time to come, be not bound or charged to give judgement upon others then upon their Peers, nor shall doe it; but of that for ever be discharged, and acquit, and that the aforesaid Judgement now given be not drawn into example or consequent for the time to come, by which the said Peers may be charged hereafter to Judge others then their Peers, being against the Law of the Land, if any such case happen, which God defend.

Agreeth with the Record.

William Collet.

But notwithstanding all this, our Lords in Parliament take upon them as Judges in Parliament to passe judgement and sentence (even of themselves) upon the Commoners which are not their Peeres, and that to fining, imprisonment, &c. And this doth not only content them, but they even send forth their armed men, and beset, invade, assault their houses and persons in a warlike manner, and take what plunder they piease, before so much at any of their pretended, illegall warrants be shewed, as was lately upon the eleventh of August 1646. perpetrated against mee and mine, which was more then the King himselfe by his legall Prerogative ever could doe, for neither by verball commands or commissions under the Great Seale of England, he could ever give any lawfull authority to any Generall, Captaine, or person whatsoever without legall triall and conviction, forceibly to assault, rob, spoile or imprison any of the free Commoners of England: and in case any free Commoner by such his illegall Commissions, Orders or warrants before they be lawfully convicted, should be assaulted, spoiled, plundered, imprisoned, &c. in such cases his agents and ministers ought to be proceeded against, resisted, apprehended, indicted and condemned (notwithstanding such commissions) as Trespassers, Theeves, Burglaters, Felons, Murderers both by Statute and common Law, as is enacted and resolvd by Magna Charta, cap. 29. 15. Eliz. 3. stat. 1. cap. 1, 2, 3, 42. Eliz. 5. cap. 13. 28. Eliz. 1. Artic. sup. chartas, cap. 2. 4. Eliz. 3. cap. 4. 5. Eliz. 3. cap. 2. 24. Eliz. 3. cap. 1. 2. Rich. 2. cap. 7. 5. Rich. 2. cap. 5. 1. Hen. 5. cap. 6. 11. Hen. 2. cap. 1. 106. 24. Hen. 8. cap. 5. 21. Jacob. cap. 3.

And if the King himselfe have not this Arbitrary power, much lesse may his Peeres or Companions, the Lords over the free Commons of England. And therefore notwithstanding such illegall censures and warrants either of King or of Lords &illegible; no legall conviction being made) the persons invaded and assaulted by such open force of Armes may lawfully arme themselves, fortifie their Houses (which are their Castles in the judgement of the Law) against them, yea, disarme, beat, wound, represse and kill them in their just necessary defence of their own persons, houses, goods wives and families, and not be guilty of the least offence, as is expresly resolved by the Statute of 21. Edw. de male factoribus in parcis, by 24. Hen. 8. cap. 5. 12. Hen. 6. 16. 14. Hen. 6. 24. 35. Hen. 6. 12. E. 4. 6.

And therefore (Sir) as even by nature and by the Law of the Land I was bound, I denyed subjection to these Lords and their arbitrary creatures; thus by open force invading and assaulting my house person, &c. no legall conviction preceding, or warrant then showen; but and if they had brought and shewen a thousand such warrants, they had all been illegall antimagisteriall & void in this case, for they have no legal power in that kind, no more then the King, but such their actions are utterly condemned, and expresly forbidden by the Law: Why therefore should you of the Representative Body sit still, and suffer these Lords thus to devour both us and our Lawes?

Be a wakned, arise and consider their oppressions and encroachments, and stop their Lord-ships in their ambitious carere, for they do not cease only here, but they four higher & higher, & now they are become arrogators to themselves, of the natural Soveraignity the Represented have conveyed and issued to their proper Representors, even challenge to themselves the tittle of the Supreamest Court of Judecature in the Land, as was claimed by the Lord Hounsden, when I was before them, which you may see more at large in a printed letter published under my name, intitled, A Defiance &c. which challenge of his (I think I may be bold to assert) was a most illegall, Anti-parliamentary, audacious presumpsion, and might better be pleaded and challenged by the King singly, then by all those Lords in a distinction from the Commons: but it is more then may be granted to the King himselfe, for the Parliament & whole Kingdom whom it represents is truly and properly the highest Supream power of all others, yea above the King himselfe:

And therefore much more above the Lords, for they can question, Cancell, disantill and utterly revoake the Kings own Royall Charters, Writs, Commissions, Pattents, &c. Though ratified with the Great Scale, even against his personal wil, as is evident by their late abrogation of sundry, Patents, Cõmissions, writs, Charters, Lone, Shipmony &c. yea the body Representative have power to enlarge or retract the very prerogative of the King, as the Statute de prærog. Reg. and the Parliament Roll of 1. Hen. 4. num. 18, doth evidence, and therefore their power is larger and higher then the Kings, and if above the Kings, much more above the Lords, who are subordinate to the King, and if the Kings Writs. Charters &c. which intrench upon the weale of the People, may be abrogated, nul’d and made voide by the Parliament, the Representateve body of the Land, and his very prerogatives bounded, restrained & limited by them, much more may the Orders, Warrants, Commitments &c. of the Lords, with their usurped prerogatives over the commons and People of England be restrained, nul’d and made void by them, and therefore these Lord must needs be inferiour to them.

Further the Legislative power is not in the King himselfe, but only in the Kingdome and body Representative, who hath power to make or to abrogate Lawes, Statutes &c. even without the Kings consent, for by law he hath not a negative voyce either in making or reversing, but by his own Coronation Oath, he is sworne, to grant fulfill and defend all rightfull Lawes, which the COMMONS of the Realme shall chuse, and to strengthen and maintain them after his power; by wch clause of the oath, is evident, that the Cõmons not the King or Lords) have power to chuse what Lawes themselves shall judge meetest, and thereto of necessity the King must assent, and this is evident by most of our former Kings and Parliaments, and especially by the Raignes Edw. 1. 2. 3. 4. Rich 2 Hen. 4. 5. & 6. So that it cannot be denied, but that the King is subordinate and inferiour to the whole Kingdome and body Representative: Therefore if the King, much more must the Lords vaile their Bonets to the Commons and may not be esteemed the upper House, or Supreame Court of Judicature of the Land.

So that seeing the Soveraigne power is not originally in the King, or personally terminated in him, then the King at most can be but chief Officer, or supream executioner of the Lawes, under whom all other legall executioners, their severall executions, functions and offices are subordinate; for indeed the Representers (in whom that power is inherent, and from whence it takes its originall) can only make conveyance thereof to their Representors, vicegerents or Deputies, and cannot possibly further extend it, for so they should go beyond themselves, wich is impossible, sot ultra posse non est esse, there is no being beyond the power of being: That which goes beyond the substance and shaddow of a thing, cannot possibly be the thing it selfe, either substantially or vertually, for that which is beyond the Representors, is not representative, and so not the Kingdomes or peoples, either so much as in shaddow or substance,

Therefore the Soveraigne power (extending no further then from the Represented to the Representors) all this kind of Soveraynity challenged by any (whither of King Lords or others) is usurpation, illegitimate and illegall, and none of the Kingdomes or Peoples, neither are the People thereto obliged: Thus (Sir) &illegible; the Soveraigne or legislative power is only from the Represented, to the &illegible; and cannot possibly legally further extend: the power of the King cannot be Legislative, but only executive, and he can communicate no more then he hath himselfe; and the Soveraigne power not being inherent in him, it cannot be conveyed by, or derived from him to any, for could he, he would have carried it away with him, when he left the Parliament: So that his meere prerogative creatures, cannot have that which their Lord and &illegible; never had, hath, or can have; namely, the Legislative power: For it is a standing &illegible; in nature, omne &illegible; generat &illegible; every like begetteth its like; and indeed they are as like him, as if they were spit out of his mouth.

For their proper station will not content them, but they must make incursions & inroads upon the Peoples rights and freedomes, and extend their prerogative pattent beyond their Masters compasse; Indeed all other Courts might as well challenge that prerogative of Soveraignity, yea better then this Court of Lords. But and &illegible; any Court or Courts in this Kingdome, should arrogate to themselves that dignity, to be the supreame Court of Judicatory of the Land, it would be judged no les then high Treason, to wit, for an inferiour subordinate power to advance and exalt it selfe above the power of the Parliament.

And (Sir) the oppressions, usurpations, and miseries, from this prerogative Head, are not the sole cause of our grievance and complaint, but in especiall, the most unnaturall, tyranicall, blood-thirsty desires and continuall endeavours of the Clergy, against the contrary minded in matters of conscience, wch have been so vailed, guilded and covered over, with such various, &illegible; and specious pretences, that by the common discernings, such &illegible; canniball, inhumaine intents against their neighbours, kindred, friends and countrymen, as is now clearely discovered, was little suspected (and lesse deserved) at their hands; but now I suppose they will scarce hereafter be so hard of beliefe, for now in plain termes, and with open face the Clergy here discover themselves in their kind, and shew plainly that inwardly they are no other but ravening wolves, even as &illegible; Lyons wanting their pray, going up and down, seeking whom they may devour.

For (Sir) it seems these cruell minded men to their brethren, have by the powerfull agitation of M. &illegible; and M. Bacon, two members of the House, procured a most Romish inquisition Ordinance, to obtain an admission into the House, there to be twice read, and to be referred to a Committee, which is of such a nature, if it should be but confirmed, enacted, and established, as would draw all the innocent blood of the Saints, from righteous Abel, unto this present upon this Nation, and fill the land with more Martyrdomes, tyranies, cruelties and oppressions, then ever was in the bloody dayes of Queen Mary, yea or ever before, or since: For I may boldly say that the people of this Nation never heard of such a diabollicall, murthering, devouring Ordinance, Order, Edict or Law in their Land as is that;

So that it may be truly said unto England, we to the inhabitants thereof, for the Divell is come down unto you, (in the shape of the letter B.) having great wrath, because be knoweth he hath but a short time, for never before was the like heat’d of in England; the cruel villanous, barbarous Martyrdomes, murthers and &illegible; of Gods People, under the papall and Episcopall Clergy, were not perpetated or acted by any Law, so divelish, cruell and inhumain as this, &illegible; what may the free People of England expect at the hands of their Presbyterian Clergy, who thus discover themselves more firce and cruell then their fellowes? Nothing but hanging, burning, branding, imprisoning, &c. is like to be the reward of the most faithfull friends to the Kingdome and Parliament, if the Clergy may be the disposers, notwithstanding their constant &illegible; fidelity and good service both in the field and at home, for them and the State:

But sure this Ordinance was never intended to pay the Souldiers; their &illegible; if it be, the independents are like to have the bast share, let them take that for their comfort: but I believe there was more Tyth providence, then State the &illegible; in the matter, for if the Independents, Anabaptists, and Brownists, were but sinceerly addicted to the DVE PAYMENT of TYTHES, it would be better to them in this case then, &illegible; men, to acquit them of Fellony.

For were it not for the losse of their Trade, and &illegible; their custome, an &illegible; Brownist, Independent and &illegible; were all one to them, then might they without doubt have the Mercy of the Clergy, then would they not have been entered into their Spanish Inquisition Calender for absolute &illegible; or need they have &illegible; the popish &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; Oath of &illegible; or &illegible; in the &illegible; &illegible; with the letter B. the new Presbyterian Mark of the Beast for you see the Devill is now againe entered amongst us in a new shape, not like an Angell of light, (as both he and his servants can transforme themselves when they please) but even in the shape of the letter B; from the power of which Presbyterian Belzebub good Lord deliver us all and let al the People say Amen; Then needed they not to have feared their Prisons, their fire and faggot, their gallowes and halters, &c. The strongest Texts in all the Presbyterian new moddle of Clergy divinity, for the maintenance & reverence of their cloth, and confutation of errours; for he that doth but so much as question that priest satning-Ordinance for Tythes. Oblations, Obventions, &c. doth flatly deny the fundamentals of Presbytrie, for it was the first stone they laid in their building, and the second stone, the prohibition of all to teach Gods word but themselves, and so are ipso facto all Fellons. &c.

By this (Sir) you may see what bloody minded men those of the black Presbytrie be, what little love, patience, meeknes, long suffering and forbearance they have to their Brethren; neither doe they as they would be done to; or doe to others as is done to them; for they would not be so served themselves, of the Independents, neither have the Independents ever sought or desired any such thing upon them, but would beare with them in all brotherly love; if they would be but contented to live peaceably and neighbourly by them, and not thus to brand, hang, judge and condemne all for Fedons, that are not like themselves. Sure (Sir) you cannot take this murthering, bloody disposition of theirs for the Spirit of Christianity, for Christian chairety suffers long, is kind, envieth not, exaltesh not it selfe, secketh not its own is not easily provoked, thinketh no evill, beareth all things, beleeveth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things; but these their desires and endevours are directly contrary.

Therefore (Sir) if you should suffer this bloody inroad of Martyrdome, cruelties and tyranies, upon the free Commoners of England, with whose weale you are betrusted, if you should be so inhumaine, undutifull, yea and unnaturall unto us, our innocent blood will be upon you, and all the blood of the righteous that shall be shed by this Ordinance, and you will be branded to future generations, for Englands bloody Parliament.

If you will not think upon us, think upon your posterities, for I cannot suppose that any one of you would have your children hang’d in case they should prove Independents, Anabaptists, Brownists; I cannot judge you so unnaturall and inhumain to your own children, therefore (Sir) if for our own sakes we shall not be protected, save us for your children sakes, (though you think your selves secure,) for ye may be assured their and our interest is interwowne in one, if wee perish, they must not think to seape. And (Sir) consider, that the cruelties, tyranics and Martyrdomes of the papall and episcopall Clergy, was one of the greatest instigations to this most unnaturall warre; and think you, if you settle a worse foundation of cruelty, that future generations will not tast of the dreags of that bitter cup?

Therefore now step in or never, and discharge your duties to God and to us, and tell us no longer, that such motions are not yet seasonable, and wee must still waite; for have we not waited on your pleasures, many faire seasons and precious occasions and opportunities these six yeares. even till the Halters are ready to be tyed to the Gallowes, and now must wee hold our peace, and waite till wee be all imprisoned, hang’d, burnt and confounded? Blame us not (Sir) if we complain against you, speak, write and plead thus with might and maine, for our lives, lawes and liberties, for they are our earthly &illegible; &illegible; wherewith you are chiefly betrusted; & whereof we desire a faithful discharge at your hands in especiall, therefore be not you the men that shall betray the blood of us and our posterities, into the hands of those bloody black executioners: for God is just, and wil avenge our blood at your hands; and let Heaven and earth bear witnesse against you, that for this end, that we might be preserved and restored, wee have discharged our duties to you, both of love, fidelity and assistance, and in what else yee could demand or devise in all your severall needs, necessities and extremities, not thinking our lives, estates, nor any thing too precious to sacrifice for you and the Kingdomes safety, and shall wee now be thus unfaithfully, undutifully and ungratfully rewarded? For shame, let never such things be spoken far lesse recorded to future generations.

Thus Sir, I have so sarre enboldened my selfe with you (hoping you will let greivances be uttered, that if God see it good they may be redressed, and give loosers leave to speake without offence) as I am forced to at this time, not only in the discharge of my duty to my selfe in particular, but to your selves and to our whole Country in generall for the present, and for our severall posterities for the future, and the Lord give you grace to take this timely advice, from so meane and unworthy an instrument.

One thing more (Sir) I shall be bold to crave at your hands, that you would be pleased to present my Appeale here inclosed, to your Honourable House; perchance the manner of it may beget a disaffection in you, or at least a suspition, of disfavour from the House: but howsoever, I beseech you, that you would make presentation thereof, and if any hazard and danger ensue, let it fall upon mee, for I have cast up mine accounts, I know the most that it can cost me, is but the dissolution of this fading mortality, which once must be dissolved; but after (blessed be God) commeth righteous judgement.

Thus (Sir) hoping my earnest and servent desires after the universall freedomes and properties of this Nation in generall, and especially of the most godly and faithfull, in their consciences, persons and estates, will be a sufficient excuse with you, for this my tedious presumption upon your patience: I shal commit the premisses to your deliberate thoughts, and the issue thereof unto God; expecting and praying for his blessing upon all your faithfull and honest endevours in the prosecution thereof. And rest;

From the most contempteous
Gaole of New-gate (the
Lords benediction)
Septem. 25. 1646.

In Bonds for the just rights and
freedoms of the Commons of
England, theirs and your faithfull
friend and servant,

Richard Overton.

To the high and mighty States, the Knights Citizens and Burgesses in Parliament Assembled; (Englands legall Soveraigne power) The humble Appeale and supplication of Richard Overton, Prisoner in the most contemptible Goale of New gate.

Humbly sheweth;

THAT whereas your Petitioner under the pretence of a Criminall fact, being in a warlike manner brought before the House of Lords to be tried, and by them put to answer to Interogatories concerning himselfe, both which your Petitioner humbly conceiveth to be illegall, and contrary to the naturall rights, freedome and properties of the free Commoners of England (confirmed to thereby Magna Charta, the Petition or Right, and the Act for the abolishment of the Star-chamber) he therefore was enboldened to refuse subjection to the said House, both in the one and the other; expressing his resolution before them, that he would not infringe the private Rights and properties of himselfe, or of any one Commoner in particular, or the common Rights and properties of this Nation in generall: For which your Petitioner was by them adjudged &illegible; & by an Order from the said House was therefore committed to the Goale of New-gate, where, from the 11. of August 1646, to this present he hath lyen, and there commanded to be kept till their Pleasures shall be further signified (as a copy of the said Order hereunto annexed doth declare) which may be perpetuall if they please, and may have their wils; for your Petitioner &illegible; conceiveth that thereby he is made a Prisoner to their Wils, not to the Law, except their Wils may be a Law.

Wherefore, your leige Petitioner doth make his humble appeale unto this most Soveraigne House (as to the highest Court of Judicatory in the Land, wherein all the appeales thereof are to couture, & beyond which none can legally be made) humbly craving (both in testimony of his acknowledgment of its legall regality, & of his due submission thereunto) that your Honours therein assembled, would take his cause (and in his, the cause of all the free Commoners of England, whom you represent, & for whom you sit) into your serious consideration and legall determination, that he may either by the mercy of the Law be repossessed of his just liberty and freedome, and thereby the whole Commons of England of theirs, their unjustly (as he humbly conceiveth) usurped & invaded by the House of LORDS, with due repairations of all such damages so sustained, or else that he may undergoe what penalty shall in equity by the impartiall severity of the Law he adjudged against him by this Honourable House, in case by them he shall be legally found a transgressour herein.

And Your Petitioner (as in duty
bound) shall ever pray, &c.

Die Martis 11. Augusti. 1646.

It is this day Ordered by the Lords in Parliament assembled, that [  ] Overton brought before a Committee of this House, for printing scandalous things against this House, is hereby committed to the Prison of New-gate, for his high contempt offered to this House, and to the said Committee by his contempteous words and gesture, and refusing to answer unto the Speaker: And that the said Overton shall be kept in safe custody by the Keeper of New-gate or his deputy, untill the Pleasure of the House be further signified.

To the Gentleman Usher
attending this House, or his
Deputy, to be delivered to
the Keeper of New-gate
or his Deputy.

John Brown Cleric. Parl.
&illegible; per Ra. Brisco Clrich.
de New-gate.

Postscript.

SIR,

YOur unseasonable absence from the House, chiefly while Mistros Lilborns Petition should have been read (you having a REPORT to make in her husbands behalfe, whereby the hearing thereof was defer’d and retarded) did possesse my mind with strong jealousies and feares of you, that you either preferred your own pleasure or private interest before the execution of justice and judgement, or else withdrew your selfe, on set purpose (through the strong instigation of the Lords) to evade the discharge of your trust to God and to your &illegible; but at your returne understanding, that you honestly & faithfully &illegible; fredeem your absent time, I was dispossessed of those feares and jealousies: So that for my over-hasty censorious esteem of you, I humbly crave your excuse, hoping you will rather impute it to the servency of my faithfull zeale to the common good, then to any malignant disposition or disaffection in me towards you: Yet (Sir) in this my suspition I was not single, for it was even become a generall surmise.

Wherefore (Sir) for the awarding your innocency for the future, from the &illegible; of such unjust and calumnious suspitions, be you diligent and faithfull, instant in season and out of season, omit no opportunity, (though with never so much hazard to your person, estate or family) to discharge the great trust (in your reposed with the rest of your fellow members) for the redemption of your native Country from the Arbitrary Domination and usurpations, either of the House of LORDS, or any other.

And since by the divine providence of God, it hath pleased that Honourable Assembly whereof you are a Member, to select and sever you out from amongst themselves, to be of that Committee which they have Ordained to receive the Commoners complaints against the House of LORDS, granted upon the foresaid most honourable Petition: Be you therefore impartiall, and just, active and resolute care neither for favours nor smiles, and be no respector of persons, let not the greatest Poers in the Land, be more respected with you, then somany old Bellowes-menders, &illegible; men, Coblers, Tinkers or Chimney-sweepers, who are all equally Free borne; with the &illegible; men, and &illegible; &illegible; in the Land.

Doe nothing for favour of the one, or feare of the other; and have a care of the temporary Sagacity of the new Sect of OPPORTUNITY TO LITITIANS, whereof we have got at least two or three too many; for delayes & demutres of Justice are of more deceitfull & dangerous consequence, then the flat & open deniall of its execution, for the one keeps in suspence, makes negligent & remisse, the other provokes to speedy defence, makes active and resolute: Therefore be wise, quick, stout and impartiall: neither spare, favour, or connive at friend or foe, high or low, rich or poore, Lord or Commoner.

And let even the saying of the Lord, with which I will close this present discourse, close with your heart, and be with you to the death. Leviticus, 19. 15.

Yee shall doe no unrighteousnesse in judgement; thou shalt not respect the person of the poore, nor honour the person of the mighty, but in righteousnesse shalt thou judge thy neighbour.

October 12. 1646.

FINIS.

 


8.33. John Lilburne, The Charters of London: or, The second Part of Londons Liberty in Chaines Discovered (18 December, 1646)

 

 

Bibliographical Information

Full title

John Lilburne, *THE CHARTERS OF LONDON: OR, The second Part of Londons Liberty in Chaines Discovered. In which by the ancient, rationall, and fundamental Charters of the famous City of London, is proved and declared, that it is the true and undeniable right of all and every the Barons, Burgesses, Free-men, or Commoners of London, to have their free Illegible word in chusing out, annually from amongst themselves, a Lord Major, two Sheriffes, and all their Aldermen; which Aldermen are annually to be removed by the Commons of every Ward; and being removed, may not be chosen again for the ensuing yeare, but others by common consent are to be put into their places. Also it is declared, to be the right of the said Barons or Common to chuse the Bridge-masters, Chamberlain, Common-Clerk, and Common-Ser|geant, &c. of the City of London, and to be removed by them when they please. All which priviledges, with many others, they are now rob’d of, by their last incroaching, and usurping, illegall Lord Majors & Aldermen, &c. Unto which Charters Illegible word annexed, a Discourse, to prove, that though Kings or Parliaments may confirme unto the people their rights, freedoms, and liberties; yet it lies not in their poweer to take them from them againe when they please; no, not at all: because all be trusted powers are (as both Kings & Parliaments, & all other Magistrates whatsoever are,) & ought always to be, for the good of the Trusters, and not for their mischief and hurt. In which is also proved, that all Pattentee-Monopolizing-Corpo|rations Section of illegible texte against, and destructive to the fundamental Laws of England; and that it is impossible for justice, peace, or prosperity, to flourish in this Kingdom, till they be all abolished. With divers other things worth the knowledg of all the Free-men, not only of London, but of all England.

For whose good this is published by Lieut. Col: John Lilburn, prisoner in the Tower of London, for the common liberties of the King|dome against the usurpations of the House of Lords.

Deut. v. 17.19. But he shall learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this Law, and these Statutes, to do them; that his heart be not lifted up above his Brethren, and that he turn not aside from the Commandement to the right hand or to the left.

Printed at London. Decemb. 18. 1646.

Estimated date of publication

18 December, 1646.

Thomason Tracts Catalog information

TT1, p. 481; Thomason E. 356. (12.)

Editor’s Introduction

(Placeholder: Text will be added later.)

Text of Pamphlet

The Printer to the Reader.

Reader, the shortnesse of time, the absence of the Authour, and the difficulty of the Language in the Charter, not being ordinary Latin, but such as Lawyers use, which is so far above my capacity, that caused me to erre when I used the best skill I could in my Art. Pardon me therefore (I pray thee) and with thy wisdome, learning, and good disposition, help me in this case. And for the faults in the English, the meanest capacity may bee helped thus:

Page 3. line 27. for Servants &illegible; p. 32. l. 24. &illegible; nay, r. wee. l. 35. r. take undue. p. 33. l. &illegible; for &illegible; &illegible; l. 21. for ity, r. City, p. 36. l. 2. r. is their right. l. 10. for as Magistrate. r. as a Magistrate p. 37. l. 1. for Trustees, r. trusters, l. 4. r. indenosonizing of a few, to undenosonize. l. 8. for divels, r. divelish. l. 12. for evill, r. evils. p. 40. l. 11. r. and intollerable. l. 26. for surreptious, read surruptitious, &c.

To the Commons of London, commonly by the prerogative men thereof, called the Clokemen of London.

FEllow Citizens, I reade in the 1 Kings 21. that when Ahab though a King came unto honest Naboth, not by his prerogative to take his Vinyard from him, but to desire it of him (for a garden of herbes, because it was neere unto his House) for a valuable consideration; &illegible; returnes his King this Answer, the Lord forbid it me, that I should give (or part with) the INHERIT ANCE OF MY FATHERS VNTO THEE; Therefore much more I hope, without offence may you and I say to our prerogative masters of London, who have already robd us by their meer prerogative pleasure (although they be far inferiour to the King) not of our Vinyard, (a small thing in Comparison) but of our naturall, rationall, nationall, and legall liberties, and freedoms, and so as much as in them lyes, have made us slaves and vaslals to their wills and pleasures: by meanes of which they do lay oppressions and burthens upon us, able to breake the backs of Pack-Horses themselves, and therefore seeing the knowledge of it in some measure, is come to our understanding, and dayly every day more and more is likely so to do; I hope it will be no blasphemy against God and the King, nor an Act deserving Naboths portion, to be stoned to death; to say unto our prerogative usurping, and incroaching Masters, God forbid, that we should be such villains and traytors to our selves, as to suffer you to rob and steal from us (and run away with) the inheritance of our Fathers, and the Birth-right of us and our children) our Fundamentall Lawes and Liberties, Franchises and Priviledges, that God, Nature, and the just Customes of the Land in which wee live, hath given us, and for which we have been fighting above this 3. years. For my part, though all of you should be so sottishly base, and &illegible; as to &illegible; and &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; under your burthens; yet though I should not find one man amongst you all of my mind, I am resolved to send the loudest Hue-and-Cry after them that possible I can, for the regaining of my liberties, Freedoms, and &illegible; priviledges; though I should by the iniquity of the present for sworn, tyrannizing, oppressing, and &illegible; times, pay as dear for my so doing, as Naboth did for his unwillingnesse to part with his Vineyard his Inheritance.

My Hue-and-Cry after these London-prerogative Robbers, I begun in my late book, called LONDONS LIBERTY IN CHAINES DISCOVERED, printed in Octob. Last: the second part of which Hue-and-Cry this present discourse is; But here I must crave leave to &illegible; you my fellow-Citizens, that by &illegible; of those many difficulties which accompanie the Presse (&illegible; &illegible; their proceedings very slow) my present Hue-and-Cry cannot be so loud, &illegible; I intended its because I would fain have you to have the sight of so much, as herein you shall reade, before the day you chuse Common-Councell then: after which, you may &illegible; an APPENDIX to this Discourse of some length, and also, all the rest of your CHARTERS at large, with observations upon them, deducted from the Fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdom: in which Discourse, you shall find such a pack of jugling knavery, as your eyes never read before.

Only this at present, I shall &illegible; to take notice of, that the City-prerogative Champions, &illegible; Lysimachus, the Author of the rotten and putrified book, called Bellamius Enervatus, and Col. John Bellamy (a kinsman to the Wethercocks) in his late Answer to the said book, called Lysimachus, Enervatus, Bellamius Reparatus, and in his Plea for the Commonally of London, spends much pains, pro and con, to find out, whether or no the L. Major, & Aldermen of London have an absolute negative voyce in the common Councel; both whose Discourses do not at all please me, nor &illegible; the true rights and priviledges of the Commons of London: and therefore, I shall lay down this position, and challenge all the City-prerogative-Champions, to a single combate, to make it good against them all; the Proposition is this, that the present “Lord Major, and the present Court of Aldermen have no right at all, to give any vote at all in the Comon-Councell of so much as to be present there: And my Reasons are those that follow.

First of all, the present Lord Major is no legall Lord Major nor the present Aldermen, no legall &illegible; true Aldermen, and therefore have no true right at all in any sence to come there; out as Delinquents to receive condigne punishment, by being &illegible; for their usurpations and incroachments, as by the Charter of Edward the 2. they ought, pag. 30, 31, &c. And that the Lord Major is no legall Lord Major, I thus prove.

First, because by the 4. Charter of King John granted to the BARONS of London (which is every Free man) in the 9. of May, in the 16. year of his raign; and by the Charter of Henry the 3. which you may read in the following Discourse. pag. 28. 29. there is power given to the BARONS OF LONDON, that they may of themselves, chuse from amongst them, &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; Major, which priviledge is confirmed by K. Ed. the 2. at the &illegible; desire of the Major, Aldermen, and the rest of the Citizens; as you may read in the 30. pag. following & which priviledge is confirmed to all the Citizens of London, by Magna Charta, chap. 9. and 1. E. 3. 9. 14. E. 3. 1. 9. H. 4. 1. and by the &illegible; of Edward the 1. called articuli super chartas, chap. 1. in which &illegible; is also a power given to the Commonalty in every Shire Court, to chuse the Justices of the Peace for their respective Counties; which said Commone have power by the statutes of the 18. E. 1. 8. & 13. chapters, to chuse their own Sheriffes in &illegible; Shire; and this manner of popular elections is granted to be the right of all the Free-men of London, by both the fore-mentioned Authors. But this Lord Major is not in the least legally chosen. Reade the fore-mentioned first part of this Discourse, page 8, &illegible; 13, 14, 15. Ergo, he is no true nor legall Lord Major: And the same I say of all the Aldermen.

My second reason to prove the fore-mentioned Proposition is this, because that if the King have no legislative power in himself, as the Parliament proves its their Declarations of the 26. May, 1642. and 2. Novemb. 1642. and which begins in &illegible; &illegible; of the collection of Dec. page 262. 686. and which Mr Pryn much more proves in the second part of his Soveraign power of Parliaments, p. 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, &c. which book is published by speciall authority from the House of Commons, &illegible; appeares by the Title-page thereof now if this be true, then I affirme, he cannot give or depute a legislative power to the Lord Major, and Aldermen of London; no, nor to his Lords, who pretendedly will themselves the Vpper House of Parliament: for it is impossible, for him to give that to another, which is not inherent in himself: But the Lord Major and Court of Aldermen, for any thing I can perceive, either by their Champion, or any other, lay no claime to their pretended power of voting to make Lawes in the Common-Councell; but the authority of the prerogative-Charter of Edward 3. which in such a case is not worth a button.

My third reason to prove the proposition is this; because the only and sole legislative Law making power, is originally inherent in the people and &illegible; in their Commissions chosen by themselves by &illegible; consent, and no other. In which the poorest that lives, hath as true a right to give a vote, as well as the richest and greatest; and I say the people by themselves, or their legal Commissions chosen by them for that end, may make a Law or Lawes to govern themselves, and to rule, regulate, and guide all their Magistrates (whatsoever) Officers, Ministers, or Servants, and ought not in the least to receive a Law from them, or any of them, whom they have set over themselves, for no other end in the world, but for their better being, and meerly with Justice, equity, and righteousnesse, to execute the Lawes that they made themselves, and betrusted them with, as the publique executors or dispensors of. But the Lord Major and Aldermen (admit there were no exceptions against the manner of their coming into their Offices) were never chosen by the Commons of London, not in the least, to set in Common-Councell to vote and make Lawes to binde them, but meerly and at the most, are Officers chosen and betrusted for no other end at all, but for the better being, peace, and prosperity of the City, to execute the just Lawes of the Kingdome already made in Parliament, by common consent of the whole Kingdom; and therefore have no right at all in no sence, to set in Common-Councell, there to vote, and make Lawes to bind the Citizens. And therefore, O my fellow-Citizens, I desire you to bee wise, and looke about you, and not suffer these Mungrell, usurping, increaching, pretended Aldermen, to Lord paramount it over you, as they used to do at your election of your Common-councell men: at which election, (for any thing I know, or can heare of) they ought not to be present at all, unlesse they come as particular citizens to give a single voyce, in chusing their (as well as your) Common-councell men, whose principall office and work it is by vertue of their deputed power derived &illegible; &illegible; to call all your City Magistrates, Ministers, and publick &illegible; to an account, and to dis-franchise all those that have endeavoured the destruction of Londons just liberties, and to know of them what they have done with those many hundred thousands of pounds, that yearly is paid into the Chamber of London, which ought principally by right to be laid out to pay or defray the publick charges of the City, and taxations of the &illegible; that are laid upon it by common consent in Parliament, &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; spent in hugger-mugger, and laid out for such &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; put into the pockets or purses of such, as it was never &illegible; for. Look to it you Lord Major and Aldermen, brethren in &illegible; for I professe there is the most notorious jugling and chearing amongst you, that is amongst any generation of men in England; which I hope, in the despite of you all, to live in some good measure to anatomize to my fellow-citizens, whom, before I conclude, I shall desire to take notice of foure things, as the most pestilent evils in the world, amongst the sonnes of men, and they are these:

First, the Popes unwritten &illegible; Secondly, Kings unlimited Prerogatives. Thirdly, Parliaments unknown Priviledges. Fourthly, the Lord Major, Court of Aldermen, and the rest of the Prerogative men of Londons implicit faith, who in the second desire of their most pernitious Atheisticall, Papisticall Remonstrance, pag. 7. would have all those fully declared against, and some effectuall course setled, for proceeding against all such persons as will not be conformable to the publick Discipline established, or to be established. What ever it be, it matters not, although it be never so much against justice, reason, equity, conscience, and the word of God.

By means of some of these foure, ariseth all those Monopolizing and ingrossing Patentee corporations, that trouble the world: this poore Kingdome; yea, even this City, a great number of whose members, by reason thereof, are (as I am informed) forced $$Para$$

But &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; you (my fellow-citizens) seeing &illegible; Common &illegible; &illegible; have &illegible; &illegible; them to be &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; power, as they &illegible; &illegible; you &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; your selves, &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; and let &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; that &illegible; &illegible; no further &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; Commissioners sitting in Parliament who &illegible; and &illegible; &illegible; power to say taxes upon you, and therefore I &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; the jurisdiction of the Common-councell of &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; especially seing there is no need nor &illegible; of it &illegible; (as I am &illegible;) that the annuall treasure of the &illegible; of London, is above five hundred thousand pounds which ought to besaid out to beare and &illegible; the publick taxes &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; City, and our own following &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; 31. &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; how to &illegible; your Parliament taxes &illegible; my &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; love presented to all you my &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; God, and &illegible;

From my captivity in the
Tower of London, Decemb.
14. &illegible; for the
common &illegible; of England,
invaded by the
usurping Lords, &c.

Your true and cordiact &illegible; (and
fellow-Citizen) if you will stand for &illegible; &illegible; and &illegible;

JOHN LILBURN.

CARTÆ DE ANNO SECVNDO REG. HEN. 5. Parte secunda, num. 11.

De Confirmatione London.REX eisdem salutem. Inspeximus Cartam Dom. Honr. nuper Regis patris nostrifactam in hæe verba, Hen. &c. Inspeximus etiam tenorem Cartæ Dom. H. quondam Regis Angl. progenitoris nostri factam in hac verba: Henricus Dei gratia Rex Angliæ, Archiepiscopo Cantuar. & Episcopis & Abbatib. & Com. & Baron. & Justic. & Vic. & omnibus fidelibus suis Francis & Anglicis totius Angl. salutem. Sciatis nos Concessisse Civibus meis London. stenend. Middlesex. per firmam pro 300. l. ad compotum ipsis & heredib. suis, de me & heredib. meis. Ita quod ipsi Cives ponent Vicecomitem qualem voluerint de seipsis & Justic. quemcunque vel qualem voluerint de seipsis ad custostienda placita Coronæ meæ & eadem placitanda, & nullus alius erit Justic. super ipsos homines London. & Cives non placitabunt extra muros Civitatis pro ullo placito, & sint quieti de Schot & de Lot. & de danegeld, & de murdro & nullus eorum faciat bellum. Et si quis Civium de placitis Coronæ implacitatus fuerit (per sacram. quod iudicatus fuerit in Civitate;) se disrationet. homo London. Et infra muros Civitatis nullus hospitetur neque de mea familia, neque de alia vi alicui liberatur. Et omnes homines London. sint quieti & liberi, & omnes eorum res per totam Angl. et per portus maris de theloneo & passagio, & lestagio, & omnibus aliis consuetud. & Ecclesiæ, & singuli Barones & Cives habeant & teneant bene & in pace socas suas cum omnibus consuetud. Ita quod hospites qui in socis hospitabuntur nulli dent consuetudines nisi illi cujus soca fuerit, vel ministro suo quem ibi posuerit. Et homo London. non judicetur in ameraiam. pecuniæ nisi sawere, scil. ad C. s. dico de placito quod pecuniam ad pertineat. Et amplius non sit miskennine in hustengo, neque in Folkesmot, neque in aliis placitis infra Civitatem. Et Hustengum sedeat semel in hebdome; viz. die Lunæ. Et terras & vadimonia & debita Civibus meis habere faciam infra Civitatem & extra, & de terris de quibus ad me clamaverint rectum eis tenebo lege civitatis. Et si quis theloncum vel consuetud. à civibus meis London. ceperit; Cives London. in Civitate capiant de Burgo, vel de villa ubi theloneum vel consuetudo capta fuerint quantum homo London. pro theloneo dedit & proinde de dampno receperit. Et omnes debitores qui civibus London. debita debent eis reddant in London. vel in London. se disrationent quod non debent quod si reddere noluerint, neque quod non debent ad disrationand. venire; tunc cives London. quibus debita sua debentur capiant namia sua in civitate London. de Burgo vel villa, vel de Com. in quo manet qui debitum debet. Et cives London. habeant fugationes suas ad fugandum, sicut melius & plenius habuerint antecessores corum; scil. in Chiltre, & Middlesex, & Surr. Test. Episcop. Winton. & Rob. filio Rich. & Hug. Bigot, & Alvero de Toreney, & Will de Alb. Spino, & Huberto Reg. Camerario, & Willielmo de Mountficher, & Hangulfo de Tanei, & Johanne Beller,Hen. 2. & Roberto filius Sywardi apud Westmonast. Inspeximus insuper cartam Dom. Henrici secundi quondam Reg. Angl. progenitoris nostri factam in hæc verba: H. Rex Angliæ, & Dux Normandiæ & Aquitaniæ, & Comes Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatib. Com. Baron. Justic. Vic. Ministris, & omnibus fidelibus suis Franc. & Anglis totius Angliæ salutem. Sciatis me concessisse Civibus meis London. quod nullus corum placitet extra muros civitatis London. de ullo placito præter placita de tenuris exterioribus, exceptis Monetariis & Ministris meis. Concessi etiam eis quietanciam murdri infra urbem & in portsoca. Et quod nullus eorum faciat duellum: & quod de placitis and Coronam pertinentib. se possint disrationare secundum antiquam consuetud. civitatis prædictæ. Et quod infra muros Civitatis nemo capiat hospitium per vim vel per liberationem Marescalli. Hoc etiam eis concessi quod omnes Cives Lond. sint quieti de theloneo & lestagio per totam Angli. & per portus maris, & quod &illegible; de amerciam, pecuniæ judicetur, nisi secundum legem civitatis quam &illegible; tempore Reg. H. avi mei. Et quod in Civitate in nullo placito sit meskeninga, Et quod Hustingum semel tantum in hebdomade teneatur: & quod terras suas & tenuras & vadimonia & omnia debita justè habeant, quiconque eis debeat, & de terris suis, & tenuris quæ infra urbem sunt, rectum eis teneatur secundum consuetudinem civitatis. Et de omnibus debitis suis quæ accommodata fuerint apud Lond. & de vadimoniis ibidem factis placita apud Lond. teneantur. Et si quis in tota Anglia theloneum, vel consuetudinem ab hominibus Lond. ceperit postquam ipse à recto defecerit vic. Lond. nanium iude apud Lond. capiat. Concedo etiam eis quod habeant fugaciones suas ubicunqueeas habuerint tempore Reg. H. avi mei. Insuper etiam ad emendationem civitatis; eis concessi quod omnes sint quieti de Brudtol, & de Childwice, & de Ieresgiene, & de Scotale. Ita quod Vic. &illegible; Lond. vel aliquis alius Baillivus scotale non fac. Has prædict. consuetud. eis concedo, & omnes alias libertates, & liberas consuet. quas habuerunt tempore Reg. H. avi mei, quando mehores vel liberiores habuerunt. Quare volo & sirmiter præcipio quod ipsi & heredes eorum hæc omnia prædicta hereditarie habeant & teneant de me & de meis hered. Test. T. Archiepiscopo Cantuar. R. Episcopo Lond. Phil. Episcopo Bothon. Ern. Episcopo Lexon. T. Cancell. R. de novo Burgo de sancto Walr. R. de Waren. Wal. Mammot. Ric. de Lucy, Guar. filio Gerold Mann. Biset. loc. de Baillolio apud Westmonast. Inspeximus etiam cartam Dom. Ric. primi quondam Regis Angliæ progenitoris nostri factam in hæc verba.

Ri. 1.Ric. Dei gratia, Rex Angl. Dux Normand. Aquit. Com. Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Comir. Baronibus, Justic. Vic. Ministris, & omnibus sidelibus suis Francis & Anglis totius Angliæ salutem. &illegible; nos concessisse Civibus nostris London, quod nullus eorum placitet extra muros civitatis London. de ullo placito præter placita de tenuris exterioribus, exceptis monetariis & ministris nostric Concessimus etiam eis quietantiam murdri infra urbem, & in Portsocha, & quod nullus corum fac. duellum. & quod de placitis ad coronam pertinent. se possint disrationare secundum antiquam consuetud. civitatis. Et quod infra muros civitatis nemo capiat hospitium per vim, vel per liberationem Marescalli. Hac etiam eis concessimns quod omnes cives Lond. siat quieti de teloneo & lestagio per totam Angliam, & per portus maris. Et quod nullus de amerc. pecuniæ judicetur, nisi secundum legem civitatis quam habuerunt tenipore Regis Henrici avi Henr. patris nostri. Et quod in Civitate in nullo placito sit miskenninga. Et quod hustingum semel tantsi in hebdom. teneatur, & quod terras suas & tenuras & vadimonia, & debita omnia justè habeãt quicunq; eis debeat & de terris suis & tenuris quæ infra urbem sunt, rectum eis teneatur secundum consuetudinem civitatis, & de omnibus debitis suis quæ accommodata fuerint apud London. & de vadimoniis ibidem factis placita apud London. teneantur. Et si quis in tota Anglia teloneum vel cousuetudinem ab hominibus London. ceperit postquam ipse à recto &illegible; Vic. London. nanium inde apud London. capiat. Concedimus etiam eis quod habeant fugacionus suas ubimaque eas habuerunt tempore Reg. H. avi Henr. patris nostri. Insuper etiam ad emendationem civitatis, eis concessimus quod omnes sint quieti & de Beidtol & de Chidwite, & de Ieresgiene, & de Schothale. Ita quod Vic. nost. Lond. vel aliquis alius Ballivus Scothale non fac. Has prædictas, consuetudines eis concedimus & omnes alias libertates & liberas consuetudines quas habuerunt tempore Reg. Henrici avi Henr. patris nostri quando meliores vel liberiores habuerunt. Quare volumus & firmiter præcipimus, quod ipsi & heredes eorum hæc omnia prædicta hereditarie habeant & teneant de nobis & Heredib. nostris. Test. Hub. Cant. Archiepiscopo, Rich. London, Hug. Dunelm. Gilb. Reffens. Hug. Lincoln. Episcopis. Ran. Cestrens. Rich. Com. de Clare, Willielmo Marescal. Rog. Bigot. Gaufr. filio Petri. Hug. Bardo f. Wil. Briewer, Willielmo de Waren. Dat. per manum Willielmi. Eliens. Episc. Cancel. nost. apud Winton. 23. die April, anno regni nostri quinto.

R. 1.Inspeximus etiam quandam aliam Cartam ejusdem Dom. Reg. Progenit. nostri factam in hæc verba. R. Dei gatis Rex Angliæ, &illegible; Normandiæ, & Comes Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Comitibus, Baronib. Justic. Vic. Senescallis, Castellanis, Constabular. Ballivis, Ministris, & omnibus fidelibus suis, salutem.

Noverit universitas vestra, nos pro salute animæ nostræ, & pro salúte animæ H. Reg. patris nostri, & animarum antecessorum nostrorum necnon & pro commumi utilitate civitatis nostræ London. & totius regni nostri; concessisse, & firmiter præcepisse, ut omnes Kiddelli qui sunt in Thamisia amoveantur ubicunque fuerint in Thamisia: & ne de cætero Kidelli alicubi ponantud in Thamisia. Quietuia etiam clamavimus omne id qued Custodes Turris nostræ London. annuatim percipere solebant de predictis Kidellis. Quare volumus, & firmiter præcipimus, nealiquis Custos prefatæ Turris aliquo tempore post hoc aliquid exigat ab aliquo nec aliquam demandam aut gravamen sive molestiam alicui inferat occasione prædictorum Kidellorum: satis enim nobis constat & per venerabilem patrem nostrum Hub. Cantuar. Archiepiscopum, & per alios fideles nostros nobis sufficienter datum est intelligi; quod maximum detrimentum & incommodum prædictæ civitati nostræ London. necnon & toti regno nostro occasione illorum Kidellorum proveniebat. Quod ut firmum & stabile perseveret in perpetuum præsentes paginæ inscriptione & sigillinostri appositione communivimus. His testibus. Huberto Cantuar. Archiepiscopo. Joh. Wigorniens. Hug. Coventriens. Episcopis. Joh. Comite Morton, Radolph. Comite Cestrens. Roberto Comite Leiceest. Willielmo Comite Arundel, Comite Willielmo Marescal. Willelmo de sanctæ Mariæ Ecclesia, Petro filio Herb. Mattheo fratre suo. Simon de Kymascherio de Quinceio. Dat. per manum Magistri Eust. Sarum Decani Vic. Cancell. tunc agentis. apud Insulam Andeliac. 14. die Julii aimo Regni nostri octavo.

R. Joh.Inspeximus etiam Cartam Domini Johanuis-quondam Reg. Angl. progenitor’s nostri factam in hæc verba:

Johannes Dei gratia Rex Angliæ, Dom. Hyberniæ, Dux Normandiæ, Aquitan. & Comes Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatib. s. Com. Baron. Justic. Vic. Ministris, & omnibus fidelibus suis Francis & Anglis salutem. Sciatis nos concessisse civibus nostris London, quod nullus corum placitet extra muros civitatis London. deullo placito præter placita de tenuris exterioribus, exceptis Monetariis & Ministris nostris: Concessinus etiã eis quietanciam murdri infra urbem & in portsocha: Et quod nullus eorum fac. duellum, & quod de placitis ad coronam pertinen. se possint disrationare secundum antiquam consuetudinem civitatis: & quod infra muros civitatis neque in portsocha nemo capiat hospitium per vim vel per libertationem Mariscalli. Hoc etiam eis concessi. quod omnes cives London. sint quieti de relonco & lestagio, & omnia alia consuetud. per omnes terras nostras citra mare, & ultra, & per portus maris citu mare & ultra. Et quod nullus de amerciam. pecuniæ judicetur nisi secundum legem civitatis quam habuerunt tempore Reg. Hen. avi Henrici patris nostri: & quod in civitate in nullo placitosit miskenninga: Et quod hustingum semel tantum in hebdomads teneatur, & quod terras suas & tenuras, & vadimonia, & debita omnia justè habeant, quicunque eis debeat & de terris suis & tonuris quæ infra urbem sunt; rectum eis teneatur secundum consuetudinem civitatis, & de omnibus debitis suis quæ accommodata fuerint apud Londmum, & de vadimoniis ibidem factis placita apud London. teneantur: Et si quis in aliqua terrarum nostrarum citra mare vel ultra, sive in portubus maris citra mare vel ultra; teloneũ vel aliquam alium consuetudinem ab hominibus London. ceperit; postquam ipse à recto defecerit, Vic. Lond. namium inde apud London capiant. Concedimus etiam eis quod habeant fugaciones suas ubicunque eas habuerunt tempore Regis H. avi Henr. patris nostri. Insuper etiam ad emendationem civitatis eis concessimus, quod omnes sint quieti de Bridtol & de Childwite, & de Ieresgiene, & de Scotale. Ita quod Vic. nostr. Lond. vel aliquis alius Ballivus Scotale non fac. Has prædictas consuetudines eis concessimus & omnes alias libertates & liberas consuetudines quas habuerunt tempore Regis Henrici avi Henriei patris nostri quando meliores vel liberiores habuerunt. Quare volumus & firmiter præcipimus quod ipsi & heredes eorum hæc omnia prædicta hereditarie & integre habeant & teneant de nobis & heredib. nostris. Test. H. Cantuar. Archiepiscopo Cancell. nostro. W. London. E. Eliens. G. Wynton. & G. Roffens. Episcopis: Gaufr. filio Petri Com. Essex. Williel. Mariscall. Com. de Pembroc. Hamel. Com. Waren. Rich. Com. de Clare, Rogero le Bigot, W. Comite Arundell. Willielmo de Braos. Roberto filio Rogeri, Hug. Bard. W. Bryegwar. W. de Waren. Stephano de Turneham. Simon de Pateshill. Dat. per manum prædicti H. Cantuar. Archiepiscopi Cancell. nostri apud Sorham 17. die Junii, anno regni nostri primo.

Inspeximus etiam quandam aliam Cartam ejusdem Domini Johan. factam in hac verba:

Johannes Dei gratia Rex Angliæ, Dominus Hyberniæ, Dux Normandiæ, Aquitaniæ, & Comes Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Comit. Baron. Iustic. Vic. præposttis & omnibus Ballivis & fidelibus suis salutem. Sciatis nos concessisse & præsenti carta nostra confirmasse, civibus London. Vicecom. Lond. & de Middlesex, cum omnibus rebus & consuetudinib. quæ pertinent ad prædict. Vicecomit. infra civitatem & extra per terras & per aquas: Habend. & tenend. eis, & heredibus suis finabiliter de nobis & hered. nostris: reddendo inde aunuatim nobia & heredib. nostris tres cent. lib. Sterlingorum blancorum duobus terminis anni; scilicet ad scaccar. Pasch. centum & quinquaginta lib. Et ad scaccar. sancti Mich. centum & quinquaginta lib. salvis civibus London omnibus libertatibus & liberis consuetud. suis. Et præterea concessimus civibus London. quod ipsi de scipsis faciant Vicecom. quoscunq; voluerint & amoveant quando voluerint & eos quos fecerint Vic. præsentent Iustic. nostris qui respondeant nobis vel Iustic. nostris ad Scaccar. nostrum de hiis quæ ad prædictum Vicecom. pertinent ex quibus nobis respondere debent, & nisi sufficienter responderint & satisfecerint; cives London. respondeant & satisfaciant de amercia. & firma salvis eisdem civibus libertatibus suis, sient prædictum est. Et salvis Viceisdem libertatibus quas alii cives London habent. Ita scilicet quod si illi qui pro tempore fuerint Vicecom. constituti aliquid delictum fecerint unde amerciam. pecuniæ debeant incurrere; non judicentur ad plus nisi ad amerciam. viginti librarum & hoc sine dampno aliorum civium si Vic. non sufficiant ad amerc. suorum solutionem. Si vero aliquod delictum fecerint, per quod periculum vita vel membrorum incurrere debeant; judicentur sicut judicari debent per legem civitatis: de hiis antem quæ ad prædictum Vic. pertinent respondeant Vicecom. ad Scaccar. nostrum coram Iustic. nostris: salvis eisdem Vic. libertatibus quas alii cives Lond. habent. Hancvero concessionem & consirmationem, fecimus civibus Lond. propter emendationem ejusdem civitatis, & quia antiquitus consuevit esse ad firmam pro recentis libria. Quare volumus & firmiter præcipimus quod cives Lon. & heredes sur prædictum Vicecom. Lond. & de Middelsex, cum omnibus ad prædictum Vicecom. pertin. habeant & teneant de nobis & hered. nostris finabiliter, & hereditarie libere & quiete honorifice & integre per prædictam firmam trescentarum librarum: & prohibemus ne aliquis civibus London. aliquod gravamen vel impedimentum, vel diminutionem, de hiis quæ ad prædictum Vicecom. pertinent vel pertinere folebant facere præsumat. Volumus etiam & præcipimus, quod si nos, vel hered. nostri, vel aliquis lustic. nostrorum aliquid dederimus vel concesserimus alicui de hiis quæ ad firmam prædicti Vicecomit. pertinent. illud civibus Lond. in acquietatione firmæ suæ ad Scaccar. nostrum annuatim computetur. Test. E. Elieos. S. Bathon. Episcopis. Willielmo Mariscallo, Com. Pembr. Rand. Com. Cestrens. Willielmo Com. Arundel. Roberto fillo Walt. Willielmo de Alben. Datum per manum H. Cant. Archiepiscopi, Canc. nostri apud bonam villam super Tokam 5. die Iulii regni nostri anno primo.

Inspeximus insuper quandam aliam Cartam prædicti Domini Iohan. progenitoris nostri factam in hæc verba. Iohannes Dei gratia Rex Angliæ, Dux Hyberniæ, Dux Normandiæ, Aquit. & Comes Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus. Com. Baron. Iustic. Vic. Senelcall. Castellanis, Constabulariis, Ballivis, Ministris, & omnibus fidelibus suis salutem. Noverit universitas vestra, Nos pro salute animæ nostræ, & pro salute animæ H. Reg. patris nostri, & animarum antecessorũ nostrorum, necnon & pro communi utilitate civitatis nostræ London & totins regni nostri; concessisse & firmiter præcepisse, ut omnes Kidelli qui sunt in Thamisia vel in Medeway ubicunque fuerint in Thamisia, vel in Medeway amoveantur, & ne de cætero Kidelli alicubi ponantur in Thamisia, vel in Medeway super forisfac. decem librarum Stetlingorum. Quietum etiam clamavimus omne id quod Custodes Turris nostræ London. annuatim percipere solebant de prædictis Kidellis. Quare volumus & firmiter præcipimus ne aliquis Custos prefatæ Turris aliquo tempore post hoc aliquid exigat ab aliquo nec aliquam demandam aut gravamen sive molestiam alicui inferat occasione prædictorum Kidellorum: satis cnim nobis constat per venerab. patrem nostrum, Hub. Cant. Archiepiscop. & per alios fideles nostros, nobis sufficienter datum est intelligi quod maximum detrimentum & incommodit prædict. nost. civitat. London. neenon & tori regno nostro occanone illorum Kidellorum proveniebat. Quod ut firmum & stabile perseveret in perpetuum; præsentis paginæ inscriptione & sigilli nostri appositioue communimus hiis testibus, W. London. E. Eliens. & W. Winton &illegible; Gaufr. filio Petri Com. Essex. Willielmo Mariscall. Com. de Pembroe. H. Com. Waren. Comite Rogero de Bigot. R. Com. de Clare. Williel. de Braos, Roberto filio Rogeri. Hug. Barci. W. Briewer. Steph. de Turneham, Willielmo de Waren, Simon de Pateshill. Dat. per manum Hub. Cant. Archiepiscopi. Cancel. nostri apud Sornam. 17. die Junii, regni nostri anno primo.

Inspeximus etiam quandam aliam Cartam præfari Dom. J. factam in hæc verba:

Johannes Dei gratia Rex Angl. Dom. Hyber. Dux Normand, & Aquit. & Comes Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, Com. Baron. Justic. Vic. præpositis, & omnibus Ballivis, & sidelibus suis salutem.

Sciatis nos concessisse & præsenti Carta nostra &illegible; Baronibus nostris de civitate noster London. quod eligant sibi Majorem de seipsis singulis annis qui nobis sit fidells diseretus & idoneus ad regimen civitatis. Ita quod cum electus suerit nobis vel Justic. nostro si præsentes non snerimus præsentetur, & nobis juret sidelitatem & quod liceat eis &illegible; in fine anni amovere, & alium substituere si voluerint vol eundem retinere. Ita tamen quod nobis ostendatur &illegible; &illegible; nostro si præsentes non suerimus. Concessimns atiam &illegible; Baronibus nostris & hac Carta nostra confirmavimus quod habeant bene & in pace quiete & integre omnes libertates suas quibus hactenus usi sunt tam in cicivitate London. quam extra & tam in aquis quam in terris & in omnibus aliis locis salva nobis Chamberlengeria nostra. Quare volumus & firmiter &illegible; quod pradicti Barones nostri civitatis nostiæ London eligant sibi Majorem singulis annis de seipsis prædicto modo & quod omnes prædictas libertates bene & in pace integre & plenarie qum omnibus ad hujusmodi libertates pertinentibus sicut præd est. Testibus dominis, P. Wynton, W. Wigorn. W. Coventr. Episcopis. Wil. Brigwer. Petro filio Herberti. Galfrido de Lucy & Johanne filio Hug. Dat. per manum Magistri, Rlc. de Hariscis Canc. nostri apud Novum Templum Lond. 9. die Maii, An. Regni nostri Sextodecimo

Inspeximus insuper quandam aliam cartam supradicti Dom. J. fact. in hæc verba: Johannes Dei gratia Rex Angliæ, Dom. Hyb. Dux Normand. & Aquit, & Com. Andeg. Archiepiscop. Epis. Abbatibus. Com. Baron. Justic. Vic. & omnibus Ballivis, & fidelibus suis, salutem. Sciatis nos ad petitionem Majoris & Civium nostrorum London. Concessisse & præsenti Carta confirmasse quod Guilda telaria, non sit de cætero in Civitate London. nec uliatenus suscitetur, &c.

Inspeximus etiam quandam aliam cartam ejusdem Dom. Hen. factam in hæc verba: Hen. dei gratia Rex Angliæ Dom. Hyb. Dux Normandiæ & Aquit. Comes Andeg. Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus. Com. Baron. Iustic. Vic. Præpositis & omnibus Ballivis, & fidelibus suis salutem. Sciatis nos concessisse, & præsenti Carta nostra confirmasse, Baron, nostriæ de Civitate nostra London. quod eligant sibi Majorem dese-ipsis fingulis annis, qui nobis sit fidelis discretus, & idoneus ad regimen Civitatis. Ita quod cum electus fuerit, nobis vel Iustic. nostro si præsentes non fuerimus, presentetur, & nobis juret fidelitatem. Et quod liceat eis ipsum in fine Anai amovere & alium substituere si voluerint, vel eundẽ retinere. Ita tamẽ quod nobis ostendatur idem, vol Iustic. nostro si presentes non fuerimus. Concessimus criam eisdem Baronibus nostris, & hac carta nostra confirmavimus quod habeant bene & in pace libere quiete & integre omnes libertates suas qulbus hastonus usi sunt, tam in Civitate London. quam extra, & tam in aquis, quam in terris & omnibus alila locis, Salva nobis Chamberlegeria nostra. Quare volumus & fitmiter præcipimus quod præd. Barones nostri Civitatis nostræ London. eligant sibi Majorem fingulis annis, de se ipsis, prædicto modo; Et quod habeant omnes prædictas libertates bene & in pace integre & plenarie cum omnibus ad hujusmodi libertates pertientibus, sicut carta dom. patris nostri Johannis illustris Anglorum Regis quam inspeximus rationabiliter Testatur.

Quod convenit com recor do Will. Colet 7. Octobr. 1646.

Pat. 22. E. 3. p. 2. n. 2.Insperitnue etiam cartam dom. E. filii Regis E. quondim Regis Angliæ progenitoris nostri factam in hac verba. Edwardus dei gratis Rex Angliæ, Dux Hyb. & Dux Aquit. Omnibus ad quos præsentes literæ pervenerint salutem. Sciatis quod cum dilecti & sideles nostri Major, Aldermanni, ac cæterr Cives Civitatis nostræ London. nuper pro meliors &illegible; civitatis ejusde, ae pro comutilitate habitantium in civitate illa, & confluentium ad candem quadam inter se ordinassent, & statuissent in eadem Civitate perpetuo observanda, & nobis cum instantia supplicassent ut ea acceptare & confirmare curaremus, Nos inspectis quibusdam literis com. sigillo Civitatis illius, ac sigillo officli Majoritatis ejusdem Civitatis super præmissis patent. signatis, & nobis exhibitis, quosdam articulos a literis prædictis elici, & eos in quibusdam corrigi fecimus, prout inferius &illegible; videlicet quod major & Vicecomites Civitatis &illegible; per Cives ejusdem Civitatis juxta tenorem cartarum progenitorum nostrorum quondam Regum Angliæ eis inde confectatum eligantur, & non alio modo, & quod major Civitatis &illegible; in officio Majoritatis illius ultra unum annum simul non moretur. Et quod nullus Vicecomitum Civitatis illius qui pro &illegible; erunt, habeat nisi duos Clericos, & duos servientes ratione officii illius, & quod tales clericos & servientes sibi, suo periculo assumant, pro quibus voluerint respondere. Et quod Major Civitatis præd. dum Major fuerit, non habeat aliud officium ad Civitatem illam spectans quanr officium Majoratus ejusdem, nec sibi attraliat sen coram ipso teneat placitum vicecomitale in Camera Civitatis illus, nec alia placita quam illa quæ secundum antiquam censnetudinem Civitatis præd. tanquam Major tenere debet. Et quod Aldermanni Civitatis illius de anno in annum, & præcipue die sancti Gregorii Papæ per dictant Cõmunitatem sint amobiles & amoti anno sequẽti, non re-eligantur sed loco amotorũ alii eligantur per easdẽ Gardas de quibus sic amoti Aldermanni fuerunt. Et quod taliagia, vel auxilia ad opus nostrum, vel hæred. nostronum, sen pro statu & commodo Civitatis præd. exnunc in eadem assidend. postquam per homines gardarum ad hoc electos seu deputatos assessa fuerunt per Majorem, Aldermannos, seu alios non augmententur, nec exaltentur uisi de com. cõsensu majoris & cõmunitatis civitatis præd. & quod denarii de hujusmodi tallagiis & auxilils provenientes in custodia quatuar proberum &illegible; communariorum Civitatis præd. per Comunitatem ejusdẽ Civitatis, ad hoc eligendorum liberentur per testimonium corundem quatuor hominum ulterins liberand. Ita quod ildem quatuor homines Communitatem præd. ad quod commodum, & quos usus denarii illi devenetina &illegible; informare. Et quod nullus alienigena in libertatem Civitatis præd. admittatur nisi in hustengo, & quod indigena, & præcipue Anglicus mercator de certo misterio vel officio in libertatem Civitatis præd. non admiteatur nisi per manue aptionem sex hominum proborũ & sufficientium, de misterio vel officio, de quo ille eric qui in libertatem sic est admittendus: qui quidem sex homines manucapiant pro illo sic admittendo de conservando Civitatem præd. indempnem in illa parte & eadeni forma manucaptionis observeturde alienigenis præd. qui in libertatem Civitatis præd. in bustengo admittendi sunt, si sint de aliquo certo mesterio vel officio, & si non sint de certo mestero; tunc in libertatem ejusdem Civitatis non admittantur sine assensu communitatis civitatis illius, & illi qui in libertatem Civitatis illius, postquam regimen regni nostri suscepimus contra formas præscriptas, sunt admissi & qui contra ipsorum iuramentum, in hac parte prestitum, vel contra statum Civitatis illius venerunt, & inde legitime convincantur; libertate amittant Civitatis præd. Salvo semper quod de Apprenticiis in eadẽcivitate observentur modus & forma antiqui civitatis præd. Et quod singulis annis in præd. civit, quociens opus fuerit inquiratur si qui de libertate ejusdem civitatis de bonis aliorum, qui non sunt de eadem libertate in civitate illa mercandisas excercuerint bona &illegible; advocando propria sua esse contra ipsorum juramentum, & contra libertatem civitatis præd. & illi qui inde legitime convicti fuerint; libertatem ejusdem civitatis amittant. Et quod omnes et singuli in libertate civitatis præd. existentes & libertatibus ac libertis &illegible; ejusdem civitatis gandere volentes sint in lotto & Schotto & participes omnium onerum prossatu civitatis ejusdem, & pro. libertate ejusdem manutenendum juxta sacr. quod secerunt quando ad libertatem illam admissi fuerint, & qui hoc noluerit; libertatem ejusdem civitatis amitcat. Et quod omnes & singuli de libertate civitatis illius existentes & extra candem civitatem manentes, ac per se, vel per suoe, mercandisas stias infra dictam civitatem excercentes sint in lotto & scotto cum communariis ejusdem civitatis pro mercandisis &illegible; præd. vel aliàs a libertate sua amoveantur. Et quod cõmune sagillum civitatis præd. in custodia duorum Aldermannorum & duorum aliorum communariorum per communarios civitatis illius ad hoc eligendorum remaneat & quod sigillum illod non negetur pauperibus nec divitibus communariis de civitate præd. cum indiguerint dum tamen rationabiliter probare poterunt causam suædemãde & quod pro appopositione sigilli illius nichil capiatur. Et quod redditiones judiciorũ incaria civitatis illius & præcipue post veredictum inquisitionum captarum in casibus ubi inquisitiones capte fuerint, non &illegible; nisi difficultas intervenerit, & si difficultas intervenerit; propter hoc non remaneant ultra tertiam Cur. faciendæ. Et quod pondera & stateræ de mercandisis inter mercatores & mercatores porderandis de quibus exitus provenientes & cognitio eorundẽ ad cõmunitatem civitatis præd. pertinent in custodia proborum & sufficientium hominum de eadem civitate in officio illo expertorum & ad hoc per cõmunitatẽ præd. eligendorum remaneant ad volumatem cõmunitatis illius custodiend & quod aliis, quam sic eligendis nullatenus comittatur. Et quod vicecomites civitatis præd. &illegible; præ tempore fuerint theloneum & alias custumas, ad firmam suam pertinentes ac alia officia publica ad ipsos spectauria, & per alios excercend. si ea committere voluerint civibus sufficientibus pro quibus ipsi vicecomites respondere voluerint, & non aliis committant, & si quis per dictos vicecomites ad aliquod premissorum Deputatus, custumam indebitam capiat vel aliter se gesserit in officio illo quam debeat & ad sectam conquerentis inde convincatur, ab officio illo amoveatur, & juxta ejus demerita &illegible; Et quod mercatores, qui nõ sunt de libertate civitatis præd. vina aliqua seu alia mercimonia infra eandem civitatem seu &illegible; ejusdem ad retalliam non vendant: Et quod &illegible; aliquarum mercandisarum in civitate prædicta de catero &illegible; existant, nisi per mercatores de mesteris in quibus ipsi obroceatores habeant officia sus exercere ad hoc electi fuerint & super hoc saltem coram Majore civitatis prædict. præstiterint juramentum. Et quod omnes hospitatores in civitate prædicta, & suburbiis ejusdem, quamvis non sint de libertate civitatis illius, sint participes onerum per dictam civitatẽ pro statu ejusdem manntenendo contingentium quamdiu sie fuerint communes hospitatores sicut &illegible; &illegible; &illegible; in civitate & suburbiis prædict. ratione hospitalitatum &illegible; participabunt: salvo semper quod Mercatores de &illegible; & alii slienigenæ in dicta civitate ad invicem habitare & &illegible; possint prout hactenus facere consueverunt. Et quod &illegible; pontis civitatis prædict. & redditus & proficua ad pontem &illegible; pertinentia duobus probis & sufficientibus hominibus de civitate prædicta aliis quam Aldermannis ad hoc per cõmunitatem civitatis illius eligendis ad voluntatem ejusdem cõmunitatis &illegible; & qui cidem cõmunitati inde respondeant & non aliis committantur. Et quod nullus ferviens de Camera Guyhaldæ civitatis prædictæ capiat feodum de cõmunitate civitatis illius aut executionem faciat, nisi unus per cõmunitatem civitatis prædict. ad hoc electus: Et quod Camerarius, communis Clerious, & &illegible; serviens civitatis prædict. per cõmunitatem civitatis ejusdem eligantur & amoveantur pro voluntate ejusdem Cõmunitatis. Et quod Major & Recordator civitatis prædict. ac prædicti &illegible; & communis clericus feodis suis ratione officiorum &illegible; antiquitus statutis & solutis sint contenti, & alia feoda non capiant pro officiis supradictis. Et quod bona Aldermannorum civitatis prædict. in auxiliis tallagiis & aliis contributionibus dictam civitatem contingentibus per homines de gardis in quibus Aldermanni illi moram fecerint taxentur sicut bona cæterorum civium de ejusdem Gardis. Quos quidem articulos prout superius exprimuntur, & contenta in eisdem, &illegible; &illegible; & ratificamus, & ca pro nobis, & heredib. nostris quantum in nobis est prefatis civibus heredibus & successoribus suis &illegible; & confirmamus in civitate & suburbiis prædictis ad communem utilitatem in illis habitantium & confluentium ad eadem obtineod. & in &illegible; observand. Præterea, volentes &illegible; Aldermannis & civibus civitatis prædict. ad ipsorum requisitionem gratiam &illegible; &illegible; concessimus eis pro nobis & heredibus nostris, quod Major Aldermanni, cives, & cõmunitas &illegible; civitatis prædict. & eorum hered. & successores pro necessitatibus seu utilitatibus ejusdem civitatis nostræ inter se de ipsorum communi assensu super bonis suis infra civitatem illam super tam redditibus quam aliis & tam super mesteris quam alio modo quo expedire viderint tallagia assidere possint & levare sine occasione nostri, vel hered. nostrorum,Memorand. quod hi articuli confirmãtur in Rotulis Cartarum de anno 15. E. 3. nu. 12. seu ministrorum quorumcunq; & quod denarii de hujusmodi tallagiis provenientes in custodia quatuor proborũ & legal. hominum dictæ civitatis per cõmunitatem civitatis illius ad hoc eligendorũ remaneant, & extra ipsorum custodiam pro necessitatibus seu utilitatibus civitatis prædict. & non aliter expendantur. In cujus rei testimonium, has literas nostras fieri fecimus patentes. Teste Meipso apud Ebor. octavo die Iunii, anno regni duodecimo.

Per ipsum Reg. & Con. suis in Parliamento.Nos autem donationes concessiones confirmationes restitutiones innovationem & ordinationem prædictas necnon omnia alia & singula in Cartis, literis & tenore prædictis contenta rata habentes & grata ea pro nobis & heredibus nostris, quantum in nobis est acceptamus, approbamus, ac prelatis civibus, & corum heredibus & successoribus civibus civitatis illius tenore præsentium concedimus & confirmamus prout Cartæ literæ & tenor prædict. plenius testantur. Præterea volentes eisdem civibus suis multiplicibus exigentibus meritis & obsequiis gratiam in hac parte facere ampliorem; concessimus eis &illegible; & heredibus nostris, quantum in nobis est quod licèt ipsi vel predecessores sui aliqua vel aliquibus libertatum quietanciatum &illegible; ordinationum liberarum consuetudinum aut aliorum in dictis Cartis literis & renore contentorum aliquo casu emergente hactenus plene usi non fuerint, ipsi tamen cives & &illegible; heredes & successores cives civitatis illius omnibus & singulis libertatibus quietanciis concessionibus ordinationibus liberis &illegible; & omnibus aliis in cartis literis & tenore prædictis contentis & eorum quolibet de cætero plene & libere gaudeant & &illegible; in perpetuum sine occasione vel impedimento nostri vel hered. nostrorum, Iustic. Escaetorum, Vic. aut aliorum Ballivorum, seu Ministrorum nostrorum, vel hered. nostrorum quorumcumque. Hiis testibus, H. Cantuar. Archiepiscopo, totius Angl. Primat R. London. H. Winton. &illegible; nostro charissimo, Cancel. nostro. N. Barhon. & Wellens. Episcopia. Thoma &illegible; Iohanne Bedeford, Humfrido Gloucestr. fratribus nostris charissimis, Edwardo Ebor. consanguineo nostro Ducibus. Edmundo March. Thoma Arundel Thesaur. nostro, Richardo Warren Comitibus. Henr. le Scroop. Henr. Fitzhugh Camerario nostro. Thoma Erpingham Senescallo Hospitii nostri militibus, Iohanne Prophet Cusiode privati Sigilli nostri, & aliis. Dat. per manum Reg. &illegible; Westmonast. 12. die Iulii,

Ter ipsum Regem.

8. die Octob. 1646.

Convenit cum Recordo,

Wil. Collet.

Clausæ de anno Reg. Henr. sexti.

De proclænatione &illegible;.REX Majori & Vicecomitibus London, salutem. Cum per Cartas progenitorum nostrorum quondam Regum Angl. quas confirmavimus, concessum sit civibus nostris civitatis predict. quod Majorem & Aldermannos de seipsis quos voluerint eligant: & ipsos, nobis apud Westm. non existentibus, Thesaur. & Baron. nostris de Scaccario presentent ut ibidem prout moris est admittantur. Ac jam intellexerimus qued quanquam hujusenodi electiones per Majorem & Aldermãnos nec non diseretiores dictæ civitatis, ad hoc specialiter summonitos & præmunitos temporibus retroactis fieri consueverit: nonnulli tamen qui aliquod interesse in electionibus hujusmodi non habent, nec habere debent; electionibus illis ausu temerario se ingerunt immiscent & multociens electiones quæ rite & pacifice fierent, suis validis clamoribus & importunis multipliciter impediunt & perturbant ad intentionem quod tales eligantur qui suis malefactis & orroribus postmodum savere possent & ea sub dissimulatione dimittere impunita: quod si fieri permittaturin nostri ac coronæ & digtatis nostræ læsioné nec non status civitatis prædictæ subversioné civiutuq; nostrorum ibidem perturbationem & commotioné cederet manifeste. Nos igitur quieti & tranquillitati populi nobis subjecti providere & congruum remedium in hac parte volentes adhibere ut tenemur; vobis præcipimus firmiter injungentes quod ante tempus electionis Maioris civitatis prædictæ proxime faciend. per totam civitatem illam, & libertatem ejusdem ex parte nostra publice proclamari, & siriniter inhiberi fac. ne quis hujusmodi electioni nisi qui de jure, & secundum consuemdinem civitatis prædict. interesse debeat illi intersit quovis modo nec se de electione illa quoquo quæsito colure intromittar, neque esiam impediat vel perturber. Sed quod electio illa per Aldermannos, & alios Cives discretiores & potentiores civitatis pædict. ad hoc specialiter præmunitos & &illegible; siat & habeatur prout secundum consuetudinem sapradictam fuerit faciend. scientes pro cetto quod si quem alio modo quam ut premittitur electum nobis vell Thesau. & Baronibus de Scaccario præsentaveritis illum nulatenus admittemus & omnes illo; quos contrarium proclamationis & inhibitionis prædictarum inveneritis facientes arrestetis & eos prisonæ nostræ committatis ibidem moratur quousque pro corum deliberatione duxerimus demandand. Teste Rege apud Westmonast. 7. die Octob. Per Concilium.

8. Octob. 1646,

Convenit cum Recordo.

Wil. Collet.

The Charter of the second yeare of King Henry the fifth, Part. 2. No. 11.

Of the Cõfirmation of London.THE King to them before said Greeting. We have understood and seene a Charter of Lord Henry our father late King of England L: Henry made in these words, Henry, &c. We have seen also the Tenour of a Charter of Lord Henry somtimes King of England our Progenitor.

Henry by the grace of God, King of England.

Hen. 1.To our Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and Bishops, and Abbots, and Earles, and Barrons, and Iustices, and Sheriffes, and all other his faithfull French and English of all England, Know ye That we have granted to my CITIZENS of LONDON, to hould Middlesex by Farme for 300. l. upon accompt, to them and their heires of me and my heires; So as the said CITIZENS shall appoint a Sheriffe whom there they please of themselves, and a Iustice whomsoever and what person soever of themselves they please, to keepe the Pleas of my Crowne, which are to be pleaded for the same; And none other shall be Justice over the men of London,Note this 1. and the CITIZENS shall not pleade without the walles of London in any plea, and they shall be discharged and free of scot and lot of daneget and of murther, and none of them shall make warre. And if any Citizen bee impleaded upon pleas of the Crowne, (by oath that he was adjudged in the City) a man of London may discharge himselfe and within the Walles of the City, none may be lodged, either of my Houshold, neither by other force delivered to any, and all men of London shall be discharged and free (and all their goods) throughout all England and Seaports of Tall, and passage and Lastage and all other Customes, and the Churches and erety the BARRONS and CITIZENS may have and hould well and in peace their Sokes with all Customes, so that strangers that do lodge in the Sokes, shall pay no Custome but to him whose Soke it is, or to &illegible; Servant whom he hath there placed, & a man of London shall use be Iudged in the amercements of mony, but according to custome (to wit) in 100. s. I say the pleas which concerne Amerciaments and &illegible; or false Iudgement shall not be any more in hustings nor in folkemote, nor in other pleas within the City, and the hustings shall sit once in a week (to wit) on Monday. And I will cause the CITIZENS to have their Lands and Pledges, and what is due unto them within the City, and without, And I will do right to them by the Law of the City for the Lands which they olayme of me, and if any shall take Tole or Custome of my CITIZENS of LONDON, The CITIZENS of London in the City may take of the Burrough or of the Towne where the Tole or Custome was taken so much as the man of London for Tole gave; And moreover, for his dammage which he shall receive, and all debtors, who owe debts to the CITIZENS of LONDON shall pay them in London, or shall discharge themselves in London that they owe nor, but if they will not pay the same, nor discharge themselves; Then the CITIZENS of LONDON of those that owed them debts, may take their Pledges or Distresses in the City of London, of that Burrough or village, or of that County in which &illegible; abideth who oweth the debt. And the CITIZENS of LONDON may have their Chases to &illegible;, as well and fully as their predecessors had (to wit) “In Chiltre and Middlesex, and Surrey. Witnesses, Bishop of Wintun, and Robert the Son of Richard, and Hugh Bigot, and Allvero of Totnes, and William of White-thorne, and Hubard the Kings Chamberlaine, and William of Mount-Fitcher, and Hangulse of Taney, and Iohn Bellet, and Robert the Sonne of Syward at Westminster.

Hen: 2.Moreover we have seen a Charter of our progenitor Lord Henry the second, sometime King of England, made in these words: “Henry King of England, and Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, and Earle of Anjou. To our Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barrons, Iustices, Sheriffes, Ministers, and alour faithfull Subjects of all England, French, or English, Greeting” Know ye, that I have granted to my Citizens of London, “that none of them pleade another without the walles of London, besides pleas of forraigne tenures, except my mony Coyners and Servants” And we have also granted them a quittance of murther within the Citty, and in Porte Soke, and that none of them be inforced to make Duell, and that they may discharge themselves of pleas belonging to the Crowne, according to the ancient Custome of the said City, and that within the walles of London none take up lodging by force, or appointment of the Marshall. And this also I have granted to them, That all Citizens of London be free of Toll, and Lastage throughout all England, and Sea-ports, and that none of them be judged in mercy of mony or amerced, but according to the Law of the City of London, which it had in the time of King Henry, my Grand-father; and that in the City miskenning or false Iudgement be in no plea, and that hustings be houlden but weekly, onely once in the week, and that they may justly hould their Lands and Tenures and pledges and all debts, whoever he be that is indebted to them, and that right be done unto them of their Lands and Tenures, which be within the City, of all their debts which were borrowed at London, according to the Custome of the City, and pleas held at London, and of Pledges there made” And if any in all England “take toll or Custome of the men of London, after such shall fayle to do right” The Sheriffe of London may take distresse “thereupon at London, Also I grant to them that they have their Chases, wheresoever they had them in the time of my Grandfather King Henry. Moreover also, for the amendment of the City of London, I have granted to them, That all of them be free and discharged of Bridge-tell, and Childewite, and of Ieresgreene, and of Scotale, so that my Shrioffe of London or any other Bailiffe make no Scotale. These said Customs I grant, “and all other liberties and free Customs which they had in the time of King Henry my Grand-father; when they had them better and more free. Wherefore I will and firmly command that they and their heares may have and hold of me and mine heires, all the things aforesaid for Inheritance. Witnesses Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Bishop of London, Phillip Bishop of Bath, Edward Bishop of Exeter, Thomas the Chancelor, Robert of Newburgh of St. Walleties, Roger of Warren, Walter Munmouth, Richard of Lucy, Gerold Son of Gerold Marin Biset, Longe of Ballioll, at Westminster.

We have understood and seen: a Charter of our Progenitor Lord Richard the first, somtime King of England, made in these words.

Richard, by the grace of God, King of England, Duke of Normandy, Aquintaine, Earle of Anjou.

To our Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barrons, Justices, Sheriffes, Ministers, and all our faithfull Subjects of all England, French, and English, greeting.

Know ye, that we have granted to our Citizens of London, that none of them (except our Coyners and Servants) plead or sue without the walles of London, of any pleas, besides forraign Tenures. Also we have granted to them a discharge of Murther within the City of London, and in Portesoke, and that none of them be enforced to wage Combat, and that they may acquit themselves of the pleas belonging to the Crowne, according to the ancient custome of the City, and that none take up any lodging within the walles of the City by force, or appointment of the Marshall, These we have also granted to them. “That all Citizens of London be acquitted and free of Toll, and Lastage, throughout England, and all Seaports, And that none be adjudged in mercy of mony, but according to the Law of the City, which they had in the time of Henry, Grandfather to Henry our Father, and that miskenning our false Judgment in the City be in no pleas, and that Hustings be houlden but once in the week. And that they may justly have their Lands and Tenures, and Pawnes, and Pledges, and debts, whosoever he be indebted unto them” and right be done to them for their Lands and Tenures which are within the City according to the Custome of the City, and pleas be houlden at London for all debts which became due and contracted for at London, and for pawnes or weds there made. “And if any in all England shall take Tole or Custome of the men of London; after that such a one fail to do right, The Sheriffe of London may take a distresse thereupon at London.

We grant also to them, that they may have their Chases, wheresoever they had them in the time of King Henry, Grandfather unto Henry Our Father.

Moreover also, for the amendment of the City, we have granted to them; That all of them be acquit of Bridtoll, and of Childwite, and of Jerrisgreen, and of Scotale. So as our Sheriffe of London, or any other Bayliffe do not make Scotale.

These aforesaid Customes we grant to them, and all other Liberties and free Customes, which they had in the time of King Henry, Grandfather unto Henry our Father, when they had them better and more free.

Wherefore we will, and firmly command; that they and their Heires, all these aforesaid, may have and hold as their Inheritance, and hold of us and our heires: Witnesses, Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Bishop of London, Hugh Bishop of Durham, Gilbert Bishop of Rochester, Hugh Bishop of Lincoln, Ralph Earl of Chester, Richard Earl of Clare, William Marshal, Roger Bygot, Galfride Son of Peter, Hugh Bardolfe, Wil. Brewer William of Warren, Given by the hand of William Bishop of Ely, our Chancellor at Winton, the 23. day of April, in the fifth yeare of Our Reign.

Rich: 1.We have viewed also another Charter of Our Progenitor the said Lord the King, made in these words;

Richard by the grace of God, King of England, Duke of Normandy, Aquitane, and Earl of Anjou; To Our Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barrons, Justices, Sherieffes, Stewards, Castle-Keepers, Constables, Bailiffes, Ministers, and all his faithfull subjects greeting.

Be it known unto you all, that we for the health of our Soule, and for the health of the Soule of King Henry our Father, and the Soules of our Predecessors, and also for the common prefis of our City of London, and our whole Realme of England have granted and firmly commanded that all the Weeres which be in the Thames; be removed, wheresoever in Thames they be, and from henceforth Weeres be not set my where in Thames, we have also quite claymed all that which the Keepers of our Tower of London do use yeerly to take of the aforesaid Weeres,Note this Mr. Lieutenant of the Tower, and give over your unjust towling of fish & other bootes, sackbuts, and French Wine, Hogsheads, &c. wherefore we will and firmly command &illegible; that not any Keeper of our “Tower aforesaid at any time hereafter take any thing of any man, neither bring any demand, or burthen, or trouble upon any, by reason of the said Weeres, for it is fully made appeare unto us, and by our Reverend Father Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury, and other our faithfull Ministers; we fully understand, that great losse and disprofit did come unto our said City of London, and also to our whole Realme, by reason of those weeres, which that it may continue &illegible; and sure for ever, we have confirmed these presents by hand writing and putting to our seale thereto, witnesse Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury, Iohn Bishop of Worcester, Hugh Bishop of Coventry, Iohn Earle of Morton, (who was afterward King Iohn) Ralph Earle of Chester, Robert Earle of Leicester, William Earle of Arundel, Earle William Marshall, William of St. Maries Church, Peter Son of Herbert, Mathew his brother, Symon of Kymascheir of Rumsay. Given by the hand of Mr. Eustate, Deane of Sarum, Vice-Chancellour, then being at the Isle of &illegible; 14. of Iuly 8. yeare of our Raigne.

King Iohn. First Charter.We have seen also another Charter of our Progenitour Lord Iohn late King of England, made in these words.

Iohn by the grace of God King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy, and Aquaintaine, and Earle of Anjou.

To his Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barrons, Justices, Sheriffes, Ministers, and all our faithfull subjects French and English, Greeting.

Know ye that we have grantes to our CITIZENS of LONDON that none of THEM (except our Coyners and Servants) be impleaded without the walles of the City of any pleas, besides pleas of forraigne Tenures out of the liberties. We have granted also to THEM acquittance of murther within the City and Suburbs, and that none of THEM be compelled to wage battayle, and that they may discharge THEMSELVES of the pleas belonging to our Crowne, according to the ancient Custome of the City, and that within the walles of the City, nor Subburbs no man take up lodging by force or appointment of the Marshall.

This we have also granted to THEM, that ALL THE CITIZENS of LONDON be aquit of Tole, and Lastage, and of all other Customes through all our dominions on this side of the Sea and beyond. And that none in mercy of money be judged or amerced, but according to the Law of the City which they had in the time of King Henry, Grandfather of Henry our Father. And that misk &illegible; or false Iudgment, be no. in any pleas in the City, and that Hustings be holden onely but once in a week: And that they justly have all their Lands, and Tenures, and Pawnes, and debts of him, who ever he be that is indebted to them, and that right be holden to them of their Lands and Tenures which are within the City, according to the customes of the City, and of all their debts which were borrowed at London, and of Pawnes there made unto them, the pleas thereof shall be houlden at London, and if any within any of our Dominions on this side of the Sea, or beyond, or in any parts of the Sea, shall take any Toll, or any other Custome of the men of London, after that he shall faile to do right. The Sheriffe of London may take therefore a distresse at London. We grant also to them, that they have their Chases wheresoever they had them in the time of King Henry Grandfather to Henry our Father. Moreover also for the amendment of THE CITY, we have granted to THEM that they be ALL acquit and discharged of Bridg-toll, and Childwise, and of Ieresgreene, and of Scotale, so that our Sheriffe of London, or any other Bayliffe, do not make Scotale. These aforesaid Customs we have granted to THEM, and all other liberties and free Customs which THEY had in the time of King Henry, Grandfather to Henry our Father, when they had them better, or more free. Wherefore we will and strictly command, that THEY and THEIR Heires, have fully and for inheritance, wholly, all these aforesaid, and hold of us and our Heirs. WITNESSESH, Archbishop of Canterbury our Chancellor, W. Bishop of London, E. Bishop of Ely, G. Bishop of Winton; G. Bishop of Rochester, Geffrey sonne of Peter Earle of Essex, William Marshall Earle of Pembroke, Hansel Earle of Watren, Richard Earle of Clare, Roger &illegible; William Earle of Arundell, William of Braus, Robert sonne of Roger, Hugh Bard, W. Bridgwarren, W. of Warren, Stephen of Turnham, Simon of Pateshill. Given by the hand of the aforesaid H. Archbishop of Canterbury our Chancellor, at Sorham, the &illegible; of June, in the first yeare of our reigne.

K. Iohns second Charter.We have also viewed another certain Charter of the said Lord John, made in these words, John by the grace of God King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy, Aquitain, and Earle of Anjou. To his Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barons, Justices, Sheriffes, Stewards, and all our Bailiffes and faithful subjects, greeting.

Know yee, that we have granted, and by this present Charter confirmed to the CITIZENS OF LONDON, the Sheriffwick of Middlesex, with all things and customes which appertain to the said Sheriffwick, within the Citie and without, by land and by water, to have and hold to THEM and THEIR HEIRES for ever, of us and our heires; paying there for yearly to us and our heires, 300. l. Sterling Blankes, at two tearmes of the yeare, To wit, at the Exchequer at Easter, 150. l. and as the Exchequer 150. l. at &illegible;; saving to the CITIZENS OF LONDON all their Liberties and free Customes. Furthermore, we have granted to the CITIZENS OF LONDON, That they OF THEMSELVES may make Sheriffes whom THEY will, and remove them when they please; and that they present there whom they make Sheriffes, to our Justistices, who may answer to us, as our Barons of the Exchequer, for these things belonging to the said Sheriffwicks, of which they ought to answer to us: And if they do not fully answer and satisfie the CITIZENS OF LONDON are to answer and satisfie of the Amercement of the Farm; saving to our said CITIZENS their liberties as aforesaid, and saving to the said Sheriffes the same liberties which other the said Citizens of London have, yet so that if those which for the time being shall be appointed Sheriffes, shall commit any offence; wherefore they ought to incurr the mercy of mony, or be amerced, shall be adjudged or condemned in no more but in forfeiture of 20. l. (AND THAT WITHOVT LOSSE OR PREJVDICE OF OTHER Citizens.) If the Sheriffs be not able to pay the forfeiture, But if they commit any offence for which they ought to undergoe the tryall of life or member, they are to be judged as they ought by the Law of the City; But of that which belongs to the Sheriffwick, the Sheriffes shall answer in our Exchequer, before our Barons, Saving to the said Sheriffes the liberties which other Citizens of London have.

This grant and confirmation we have made to our Citizens of London, for the amendment of the said Citie. And because anciently it hath been accustomed to be let to farm for 300 pounds, wherefore we will and firmly command, that our citizens of London and their heires have and hold of us and our heirs for ever, and by inheritance freely and quietly, honorably and fully, the said Sheriffwick of London and Middlesex by the aforesaid Farme of 300. pound. And we forbid that not any presume to make any let or hindrance to the citizens of London of that which belongs or was accustomed to belong to the said Sheriffwick. Also Wee will and command, that if We, our heires, or any of our Justices, have given or granted to any, ought of that which belongs to the Farme of the foresaid Sheriffwick; the same shall be yearly allowed upon account in the Exchequer to the citizens of London, in discharge of their Farme. WITNESSES. E. Bishop of Ely, S, Bishop of Bath, William Marshall Earle of Pembroke, Rand Earle of Chester, Wil. Earle of Arundel, Robert sonne of Walt. Will. of Albans, Given by the hand of H. Archbishop of Canterbury our Chancellor, at Bona villa upon Toke, the fifth of July in the first yeare of our reigne.

K. Johns third charter.Moreover wee have seen another certaine Charter of the said Lord Iohn our Progenitor made in these words.

Iohn by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy, Aquitaint, and Earle of Anjou. To our Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barrons, Justices, Sheriffes, Scuards, Castle-Keepers, Constables, Bayliffes, Ministers, and other his faithfull subjects, greeting.

“Be it knowne unto you all, that we for the health of our Soule, and for the health of the Soule of King Henry our Father, and the Soules of our Progenitors, and also for the common profit of our City of London, and our whole Realm, have granted and firmly commanded that all the Weeres which are in Thames or Medewayes, wheresoever they be in Thames or Medeways, be removed thence and from henceforth no Weeres be set any where in Thames or Medeway, upon forfeiture of ten pounds starling; We have also quite claimed all that which our Keepers of our Tower of London were wont yearly to take of the said Weeres; Wherefore we will and firmly command, that nor any Keeper of the aforesaid Tower; at any time hereafter enact any thing of any, nor bring upon any, demand, burthen, or trouble by reason of the aforesaid Weeres; for it is clearly made known unto us, by our reverend Father Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury, and by other our faithfull subject, & it is fully given us to understand, that very great losse and disprofit did come to our said City, and also to our whole Realme, by reason of the said Weeres, which that it may continue firme and sure for ever; we have confirmed by our inscription of this present Charter, and by putting thereto our Seal, Witnesses, W. B. of London, E. Bishop of Ely. W. Bishop of Winton, Galfride Son to Peter Earle of Essex, William Mariscall Earle of Pembroke, Henry Earle of Warwick Earle Roger of Bigot, R. Earle of Clare, William of Bruce, Robert Son of Roger, Hugh Bard, William Brewer, Stephen of Turntham. William of Warren, Simon de Pateshill. Given by the hand of Hub: Archbishop of Canterbury, our Chancellor at Sorham the 17. day of June, in the first year of our Raigne.

4.We have also seen another certain Charter of the foresaid Lord John, in these words:

K. Iohns fourth charter.John by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy, and Aquitane, and Earle of Anjou: To his Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barons, Justices, Sheriffes, Stewards, and his Bailiffes, and faithful subjects, Greeting.

By which is meant every free man of London. See Londons liberty in chaines discovered, &illegible; 11. 12.Know yee, that we have granted, and by these present Charters confirmed to our BARONS OF OVR CITY OF LONDON, that THEY May of THEMSELVES chuse yearly a MAJOR, who is to us faithfull, discreet, and fit for the Government of the Citie; so that when he shall bee chosen, he shall be presented to us, or to our Iustice, if we be not present, and to sweare to us fidelity; And that they may at the end of the yeare remove him, and appoint another, or continue him, if they please. Notwithstanding so, that he be shewed to us, or to our Iustice, if we be not present. We have also granted to our said BARONS, and by this Charter confirmed, That they may well, peaceably, quietly, and fully have all their liberties which heretofore they have used, as well in the Citie of London, as without, as well by water as by land, and in all other places, saving to us our Chamberlengarie. Wherefore wee will and firmly command, that our said BARONS OF OVR SAID CITY OF LONDON, may chuse yearly to themselves, a Major of themselves, after the aforesaid manner: and that they may well and in peace, wholly and fully have the aforesaid liberties with all things appertaining unto the said liberty, as is aforesaid. WITNESSE the Lords, P. Bishop of Winton, W. Bishop of Wigorn, W. Bishop of Coventry, William Brigwer, Peter, son of Herbert, Galfride of Lucy, and Johnson of Hugh. Given by the hand of Mr. Rich. de Hariscis our Chancellor, at the new Temple London, 9. day of May, in the 16. yeare of our reigne.

K. Iohns fifth Charter.Moreover, we have seen another certain Charter of the foresaid Lord John, made in these words:

John by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy, and Aquitane, and Earle of Anjou To his Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots. Earles, Barons, Iustices, Sheriffes, and all our Bailiffes, and faithfull subjects, Greeting,

Know yee, that we as the Petition of our Major and CITIZENS of London, have granted, and by this present Charter confirmed, that the Weavers Guild from henceforth be no more in the citie of London, nor any more revived, &c.

We have also seen another certain Charter of the said Lord Henry, made in these words:

Henry by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy and Aquitane, Earle of Anjou: To his Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earles, Barons, Iustices, Sheriffes, Stewards, and all our Bailiffes and faithfull subiects, greeting.

Know yee, that we have granted, and by this our present Charter confirmed to our BARONS OF OUR CITY OF LONDON, That THEY may of THEMSELVES chuse every yeare a MAJOR, who is to us to bee faithfull, discreet, and fit for the government of the Citie: So that when he shall be chosen, he be presented to us, or our Iustices, if we be not present, and sweare to us fidelity. And that it may be lawfull for them at the end of the yeare to remove him, and appoint another, or continue him if they please; yet so as that the be shewed to us or our Iustices, if we be not present. We have also granted to our said BARONS, and by this our Charter confirmed, That they well and in peace, freely, quietly, and wholly, may have and enioy all their liberties, which heretofore they have used, as well in the citie as without; as well by water as by land and in all other places; saving to us our Chamberidge. Wherefore we will and firmly command, THAT OUR SAID BARONS OF LONDON MAY OF THEMSELVES every year chuse for THEMSELVES a Maior after the aforesaid manner; and that they may well and in peace wholly and fully have and enioy all the said liberties, with all things belonging to the same liberties, as the Charter of our Father, Lord John, Noble King of &illegible; English (which we have seen) doth rationably testifie.

Hitherto this agreeth with the Record.

W. Colet.

7. Octob. 1646.

Pat. 22. E 2. Part 2. n. 3.We have also seen a charter of Lord Edward, some of King Edward, late King of England, our progenitor, made in these words:

Edward by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, and Duke of Aquitane: To all to whom these present letters shall come, greeting.

“Know yee, that whereas our beloved and trusty, the Major, Aldermen, and the rest of the Citizens of our Citie of London, for the betterment of the said City, and for the common profit of the Inhabitants in the same Citie, and of such as repaire and come to the same, did among themselves ordaine and enact certaine things to be for ever observed in the said City, and earnestly supplicated us, that we would take care to accept and confirme the same, we having seene certaine letters pattents touching the premises, signed with the common Seale of the said City, and with the Seale of the office of the Majoralty of the same City concerning the premises being open and presented to us;1. we have caused certaine Articles to be drawne out of the said letters pattents, and the same in some things to be corrected as here following they are set down, that is to say, That the Major,2. and Sheriffs of the said City be chosen by the Citizens of the same City according to the Tenure of the Charters of our Progenitors formerly Kings of England therefore made unto them, and not otherwise. And the Major of the citie aforesaid shall not abide in the office of his Majoralty,3. at one time, above one year. And that none of the Sheriffes of the citie for the time being, have but two Clerks,4. and two servants, in regard of that office. And that they take such Clerks and serjeants at their own peril, for whom they will answer.5. And that the Major of the citie aforesaid, while he is Major, hold no other office belonging to the citie then the office of the Majoralty of the same citie. Neither draw unto him, or hold before him in the chamber of the said citie,6. any Vicecountill plea, nor any other pleas then those which according to the ancient custome of the said citie, as Major, he ought to hold.7. And that the Aldermen of the said citie from yeare to yeare, and especially upon the day of St. Gregory the Pope, by the said Comonalty be removeble; and being removed, may not be chosen again for the ensuing yeare. But in stead of those that be removed, others be chosen by the same Wards of which the Aldermen so removed were:8. And that Tallages or Aids for the use of us, our heires, or for the State or profit of the said citie from henceforth in the same, to be assessed, alter they be assessed by men of the Wards chosen or deputed for that end, may not be increased, or raised by the Major, Aldermen, or others, but by the common consent of the Major and Commonalty of the citie aforesaid. And that the monies arising from such Tallages,9. or aids, be delivered in to the custody of foure honest commoners of the citie aforesaid for that end, to be chosen by the commonalty of the said citie, to be paid over by the testimony of the same 4. men; so that the said foure men may be able to inform the said Commonalty, for what profit and what uses the said monies went.10. And that no stranger or or alien be admitted into the freedome of the said citie, but in the Hustings. And that a Native,11. and especially an English Merchant of any trade or calling, be not admitted into the liberty of the said citie, but by the manucaption of six honest and able men of the trade or calling of which he shall be who is so to be made free; which said six men shal becom bound for him to be made free, for keeping the citie harmlesse on that behalfe. And the same manner or form of manucaption shall be observed of the strangers or aliens aforesaid,12. who are to bee made free of the said citie in the Hustings, if they be of any certain trade or office. And if they be of no trade, then they may not be made free of the said Citie, without the assent of the Commonalty of the said citie.13. And they that were made free of the citie, since we took upon us the government of our Realm, contrary to the formes prescribed, and who against their oathes in this behalfe taken, or against the State of the citie have acted and been lawfully thereof convicted, shall forfeit their freedome of the citie; Provided alwayes, that the ancient manner and form of the city aforesaid of Apprentices in the same citie, be observed.14. And that every yeare in the said citie, so often as need shall require, inquisition be made, if any free-man of the said citie, shall sell in the citie the goods of others, who are not free of the citie, by calling those goods their own, contrary to their oath, and the freedome of the said Citie: those that shall be thereof lawfully convicted, &illegible; forfeit their freedome of the citie.15. And that all and every of those which are free of the City aforesaid, and willing to enjoy the liberties and free Customes of the said City, be in Lot and Scot, and partakers of all charges for the State of the said City aforesaid, and for maintaining the freedome thereof, according to the Oath which they did take,16 when they were made free, And he that will not this do, doth forfeit the freedome of the City; And that all and every who be free of the said City, and dwell without the same, and do exercise marchandize by themselves or Agenes within the City, Be in Lot and Scot with the Commons of the City for the said Merchandize, or otherwise, they shall forfeit their Freedome;17 And that main common Seale of the City aforesaid, he in the custody of two Aldermen, and two other Commoners to bee chosen for it by the COMMONS of the City; And that the said Seal be not denyed to the poor; nay, rich Commoners of the City aforesaid, whensoever they stand in need of it, while they can reasonably18 prove the cause or demand. And that nothing be taken for the setting to of the said Seal. And that Redditions of Judgments in the Courts of the City,19 and especially after verdict of Inquisitions taken in cases where Inquisitions are taken, shall not be hindered or retarded, unlesse some difficulty fall out: And if difficulty fall out,20 yet for this they shall not remain beyond the third Court to be holden after. And that weights and measures of Merchandize, to be measured betwixt Merchant and Merchant of which the profits arising and the Cognizance of the same, belong to the COMMONALTY of the said City, remain in the keeping of honest and able men of the City, skilfull in that Calling, and to be chosen for this by the COMMONALTY of the City to be kept at the pleasure of the said COMMONALTY, and it to be intrusted by no meanes to any other, but to such so to be chosen.21 And that the Sheriffs of the City aforesaid for the time being, may set the Toll and other Customes belonging to their Farm, and other publike offices belonging to them (and to be exercised by others) to able Citizens (if they will set them) for whom the Sheriffes themselves will answer, and to none other. And if any Deputed to any of the premises,22 undue customs, or shall otherwise behave himself, in that office then he ought, and at the Sute of the Complainant be thereof convicted, Be put out of that Office,23 and punished according to his demerits. And that Marchants who are not of the Freedome of the City aforesaid may not sell any wines, or other wares within the City or the Suburbs thereof by Retaile. And that &illegible; of any Marchandize in the City aforesaid may not be, except they be chosen by Marchants of those Trades; in which these Brokers have had their Callings to exercise; and upon this at the least take oath before the Major of the said City.25. And that all common Inkeepers in the said City and Suburbs thereof; though they be not of the Freedome of the City, but partakers of the charges belonging to the said City, for maintaining the State of the City, so long as they be common Inkeepers; as other the like Inkeepers in that City and Suburbs shall partake, by reason of the Inkeepers; provided alwayes, that Marchants of Gascoign, and other strangers alwayes may dwell and lodge together in the said City, as formerly they were accustomed to do. And that the keeping or the &illegible; of the City aforesaid,26. and the Rents and Profits belonging to the said Bridge, be committed to two honest and able men of the city aforesaid, others then Aldermen, to be chosen for that purpose, by the Commonalty of the said City,27. to bee kept at the pleasure of the Commonalty of the said City, & who are able to answer to the comonalty of the said ity for the saine and not to any others. And that no Sergeant of the chamber of Guildhal of the city aforesaid, take see of the comonalty of the said City, or make execution, unlesse he be thereunto chosen by the Comonalty of the city for that end. And that the Chamberlain,28 Common-Clark, and Common-sergeant of the City aforesaid, be chosen by the Commonalty of the said City; and removed at the pleasure of the said Commonalty. And that the Major and Recorder of the said City,29. and the said Chamberlain and Common-Clark, be content with their Fees appointed, & paid of old, by reason of their office. And other fees they may not take for their offices abovesaid.30. And that the Goods of Aldermen of the said city, be taxed as the Goods of other Citizens, in Aydes, Tallages, and other Contributions happening in the city, by men of the Wards, where these Aldermen abide?

Which Articles as they are before expressed, and contained in the same; we accept and ratifie; And the same for us, and our Heires, as much as in us be, Due grant and confirme to the said Citizens, and their Successors in the City and Suburbs aforesaid, for the common profits of those that therein dwell, and of those that come thither, and the same to keep, and for ever to be observed.

Moreover, we being willing upon their Petition, to confer more ample favour upon the Major, Aldermen, and Citizens have granted to them for us and our Heires, That the Major, Aldermen, Citizens, and Commonalty of the Commons of the City aforesaid, and their Heires and Successors; for the necessities and profits of our said City, by THEIR COMMON CONSENT AMONG THEMSELVES, may assesse Tollage upon the goods within the City, as well upon Rents, as other goods and as well upon Trades as any other way, which they shall see expedient, and the same to levy without let of us or our Heires, or our Ministers whomsoever; And that the monies arising out of such Tallages, remain in the custody of foure honest and lawfull men of the City, to be chosen for it by the COMMONALTY of the City, and expended out of their custody, for the necessities and profits of the said City, and not otherwise. In Testimony whereof, we have caused to be made these our Letters Pattents. Witnesse our self at Yorke, the 8. Day of June, the 12. Yeare of Our Raign.

Memorand. that these Articles are conformed in the Rolls of the charters of the 15. year. of Ed. 3. nos 12. by the King & his Councell in Parliament.We also, as much as in Us is, have accepted, approved and by the Tenor of these prosents, do grant and confirme unto, the said Citizens, and their Heires and Successors. Citizens of the said City; the said Gifts, Grants, Confirmations, Restitutions, Innovation and Ordinances aforesaid; And also, all other things in the Charters, Letters, and Tenor aforesaid contained; To have the same firme, and sure for us, and our heires, as the Charters, betters, and Tenor aforesaid do fully testifie.

Moreover, we are willing to extend more ample favour unto the full to our said Citizens, which their lawfull merits and services deserve; have for Us, and our Heires (as much as in Us is) granted unto them; That although they, or their Predecessors by &illegible; chance falling our haire not fully hitherto used any, or some of the Liberties, Quittances, Grants, Ordinances, Free-Customes, and other things in the said Charters, Letters, and Tenors contained; Neverthelesse, the said Citizens, and their Heires and Successors, Citizens of the said City; hereafter, may fully and freely for ever enjoy, and use all and every the Liberties, Quittances, Grants, Ordinances, Free-customes, and all other things in the Charters, Letters, and Tenors aforesaid contained, of any of them, without let or hinderance of us and our Heires. Justices of Exchequer, Sheriffes, or other Baylisses, or our Ministers, or of the Heires of any of us: These WITNESSES, H. Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all England, R. Bishop of London, H. Bishop of Winton our deal Vncle and Chancellour, N. Bishop of Bath & Wells; our most dear Brethren Tho: Duke of Clare, Iohn Duke of Bedford, Humphrey Duke of Gloueester, and our cozen Edward Duke of Yorke, Edmond the Marquis, Thomas Earle of &illegible; our Treasurer, Richard &illegible; of War wake; Sir Henry Descroope, Sir Henry Fitz-Hugh our Chamberlain, Sir Tho: Eripingham Steward of our Houshold, Knights; Iohn Prophet Keeper of our Privie-Seal, and others.

Given by the hand of the King at Westminster, the 12. Day of July.

By The King.

This agrees with the Record.

William Coles.

8. day of October,
      1646.

A Clause of the 11. of King HENRY the Sixth.

The King to the Major and Sheriffes of London, greeting.

WHereas, be the Charters of Our Progenitors, formerly Kings of England, WHICH WE HAVE CONFIRMED. It is granted to Our Citizens of Our City aforesaid; That they may choose Major, and Aldermen of themselves, when they please, and present them to Our Treasurer and Barons of the Exchequer, if we be not there, That they may be allowed there, as the manner is; And now wee have understood, that although is hath been acoustomed in times by-pass, such Elections to be made by the Major and Aldermen and more discreet men of the said City, for the same purpose specially summoned and warned;

Neverthelesse, some who have no Interest in such Elections, nor ought to have Interest in those Elections, but with a rash boldnesse behaved themselves, do mixe themselves in, and many wayes hinder and trouble those Elections (which should be orderly and peaceably made) with their strong and importunate clamours: to the end, that such may be chosen, who afterwards may favour their wickednesse and errours; to that intent, the same be passed unpunished: Which if it should be suffered to be done, would manifestly tend to the dishonour of Our Crown and Dignity: as also, the subversion of the state of the City, and to the trouble and commotion of our Citizens there; We therefore willing (as we are bound) to provide for the quiet and tranquility of the people, which are subject unto us, and apply a sitting remedy in this behalf,

We therefore command, and firmly injoyn you; that before the Elections to be made of the Major of the said city; you cause in our Name, through the whole City and the Liberties thereof, to be proclaimed, and staictly inhibited, that not any be at such Election; but he that ought of right by the custome of the city to be present at it, by any means, nor by colour, or shift, do get himself in upon the Election, nor hinder or disturbe the same; But that the Election be made, and had of the Aldermen, and other more understanding and able Citizens of the said city (for it specially so warned and summoned, as by the custome of the said city is to be made) Giving you for sure to understand, that when you shall present to us, or to our Treasurer, being chosen otherwise, then as beforesaid, We will in no wise allow him. And all those whom you shall find acting contrary to the prohibition & inhibition aforesaid;

We will and command, and strictly injoyn you, that you arrest them, and them commit to our Prison, there to abide, untill wee shall give Directions for their Deliverance.

Witnesse the King at Westminster the 7. day of October.

By The Councell.

8. Octob. 1646.

This agrees with the Record.

William Colet.

This prerogative Proclamation is no Act of Parliament, but only an Act of the King and his Councell, and so of no Authority at all in Law and Right to null, make void, abridge, or overthrow the Liberty of the Citizens, Barons, Burgesses, or Commons of London, that is, their native and naturall Rights, and which is established unto them by the Fundamentall Law of the and, as their popular and universall elections is; yea, and which their right so essentially, undoubtedly, and firmly, that I say, and will venture my life upon it, to make it good; that neither King nor Parliament, divided nor conjoyned, cannot justly take away from the Citizens of London, or any other Citizens in England, their generall, universall, and free voting, in electing of their Major, Aldermen, Sheriffes, Justices of Peace, Recorder, Chamberlain, Town-clark, common-Sergeant, Bridge-master, common-councell men, constables or any other Officer whatsoever that is amongst them particularly to officiate as Magistrate; for though it be, that Kings and Parliaments may confirme unto a city or people, their Fundamentall Rights and Liberties, that so they may with more peace, quietnesse, and freedome enjoy them; yet when they have so done, they cannot take them away againe at their pleasure; no not at all, without the contracting unto themselves the odious names of Tyrants and Oppressors; for the Parliament by their own doctrin, (Book Dec. pag. 150.) “arebetrusted by the people to provide for their Weale, but not for their Woe: So that by right, they cannot make the people lesse free then they are, or were, when they found them; but may make them as much more free, as possible they can: and if a Parliament or any other betrusted Power, should be so unnaturall, as to turne the strength of their Power to ruine, overthrow and destroy the Liberties of those, that impowred, or betrusted them; What doth this else, (by their own doctrine in the fore-mentioned pag.) but instate the people the impowrers or betrusters, into an absolute condition of disobedience, or non-observance of the Precepts, Orders, Injunctions, or Commands of their impowred Trustees, or Magistrates? unlesse we think, that obedience tyes men to destroy themselves, and their Fundamentall naturall Liberties and Freedomes; the injoyment of which, makes them to differ from bruit and savadge Beasts which were never created with reason and understand that glorious Image, that God made man in, and so made him Lord over all the creatures in the world besides himself; but not in the least, to Lord it over his brother man, without a speciall assignation and mutuall assent and agreement, for the better bearing each of other; and suitable to this, is that assertion of the Parliament, in their Declaration; that all Offices of trust, are, and ought to be for the good of the Trustees. But extraordinary great are the evils and miseries, that this poor Kingdome suffers by Pattentee-corporations; which, at the best, are but an indennizing of a few, to undennise a many, And to speake properly, England being a Kingdom governed by one Law made by universall and common consent (at least in pretence) in one Parliament; all these Pattentee-corporations of what kind soever, are most illegall, wicked, and Divels make-bates in the Kingdome, which will never throughly and truly injoy peace, quietnesse, and tranquility till they be all utterly anniholated and abolished, and therefore for the further manifestation of their illegalitie, and the evill thataccrew by them to this poor Kingdom.

I judge it not amisse, in the first place, here to insert; Mr. Tho: Iohnson Merchant his late printed plea, for Free-mens Liberties, which is a most excellent piece, and worth the serious perusall. His Preface to all the Commons of England, thus followeth:

The Preface to all the COMMONS of England.

WOrthy Freemen of England; The former publique Magistrates of this Kingdom, by their Machivilian empoysoned principles and specious pretences of common good, (whereas nothing lesse was intended) have most cunningly & fraudulently coxaned you of your native freedoms, (which by the fundamentall lawes and constitutions of the Kingdom, ye were born unto) and secretly by wicked Pattents have stoln away your Birth-right, to set up the particular and self-interests of private societies: One of which I here present to your serious consideration, as a great grievance and burthen, under which, the honest Clothier especially, and thousands of poor people groan: ye know for what this Kingdom hath almost been wasted to ashes, ye have spent so much of your estates and blood, viz. the subjects liberty, to which all civill government is subservient. My advice to all is this, especially the clothiers, and others who are deeply interessed, that as they love their bleeding dying Country, their deliver and from so great athraldome; they would by petitioning, and all lawfull meanes, be earnest with the Parliament for the removall of this and all other pressures.

They are bound in duty to God, injustice to you, in dischareg all of so great a trust committed into their hands; to case you of all unjust grievances, intolerable burthens: Be therefore active in the work. For very importunities sake, your indeavours will be crowned with a happy successe, and (if you saint not) &illegible; benefit of your labours, which shall alwayes be the desire of him who is willing to serve you.

April, 1646.

Thomas Johnson.

WHosoever surveys this Island in her radiant and shining luster with community and freedome, cannot but say; O quant a &illegible; Oh how great a change! For indeed, this kingdome is a Corporation or Society of men under one form of civill government, made by common consent in Parliament, who are all bound by the law, to maintain common freedome, and the general good of each other.

But particulars, Patent-societies, swelling with a Luciferian spirit, in desiring to advance into a higher room then their fellows, did by surreptions Patents incorporate themselves, exclusively became destructive to the whole body, and subverters of the true ancient priviledges of the people. And of all societies those of Merchants are the worst, having no foundation on the Lawes; The fellowship and charter of those that stile themselves Merchants of East-land, is a Monopoly of this kind, according to the true genuine sence of the word Monopoly, relating to a private company, who asscribe unto themselves the sole exercise and benefit of such a Trade, wherein every subject hath equall freedome with them, all which this Monopoly doth, and is illegall, being contrary to Magna Charta, the Petition of Right, Statutes of Monopolies, with divers others, and in particular, these three following.

The first is of the 14. of Edw. the 3. 2. Item, where it is contained in the Great Charter, “That all Merchants shall have safe and sure conduct to go out of the Realm of England, and to come, and abide, and go through the Realm of England, aswell by water, as by land: we at the request of the Prelates, Earles, Barons, and Commons, will and grant for us, and for our heires and successors, that all Merchants, Denizens, and Forraigners (except those which be of our enmity) may without let, safely come into the said Realm of England, with their Goods and Merehandize and safely tarry, and safely return, paying the customes, subsidies, and other profits reasonably thereof due; so alwayes that franchise and free customes reasonably, granted by us and our Ancestors to the City of London, and other Cities and good Towns of our Realme of England, be to them saved.

The second is of 18. Edw. 3. 3. “That the Ordinance made before this time, upon taking of sorts of wools in every County be wholly nulled and defeated, and that every man, aswel stranger, as privie from henceforth may buy wooll, according as they may agree with the seller as they were wont to do, before the said Ordinances, and that the Sea be open to all manner of Merchants, to passe with their Merchandize where it shall please them.

By both these Statutes, it evidently appeareth, that every Englishman may transport his commodity without molestation, to what Port beyond Sea he pleaseth, and make sale for his best advantage, every Englishman being a native Denizen, and privieman of this Kingdom, according to the true meaning of the law: for it unreasonable to me, that the Law should provide better for Aliens, then her own Children.

The third is of 12, Hen. 7. 6. viz. as followeth: “Yo the discreet Commons in this present Parliament; sheweth, unto your discreet wisdomes, the Marchant-Adventurers, inhabiting and dwelling in divers parts of this Realm out of the City of London, that where they have their passage, resort, course & recourse, with their goods, wares, and merchandize in divers coasts and parts beyond the Sea, aswell into Spain, Portugal, Britain, Ireland, Normandy, France, Civil, Venice, Danske, Eastland, Freezeland, and other divers and many places, Regions and Countries being in league and amity with the King our Soveraign Lord, there to buy and sell, and make their exchanges with the said goods, wares, and merchandizes, according to the law and custome used in every of the said regions and places, and there every person freely to use himself to his most advantage, without exaction, fine, imposition, or contribution to be had or taken of them, to, for, or by any English-person or persons, &c.

By which Statute, all merchants, aswell those inhabiting in divers parts of the Kingdom, as of the City of London, as also every free-born subject, is acknowledged as his Right to have freedome to trade to the said parts mentioned, and to divers other regions and countries, without subjection to any pattent, or paying any exaction, fine, &c.

For in that the Statute saith, every person is freely to use himself to his most advantage, without exaction, &c. to be had or taken of them, or any of them, to, for, or by any English person, or persons; it clearly holds forth, that the merchant, and consequently every man that useth comerce to these parts, ought not to come under the obedience of any oppressing Corporation whatsoever.

Now Dansk and the Eastland being expressed in the Stature, which are the principall parts to which these Eastland Merchants are priviledged by their Monopoly; and indeed, the crowne and glory of the rest for venting our native commodities; as also the other included, when the Statute saith, and other divers and many places, regions, and countries;

I hope every honest man will be willing with heart and hand to endeavour the recovery of our Birth-right which the Law so evidently makes, our own, from these unjust oppressors.

2. Contrary to the light of nature, which teacheth men to walk by congrulty and equality, &illegible; to oppresse, because they would not be oppressed, nor to take away a mans right, because they would not have another use the same measure to them. Which Principles of nature are engraven upon the hearts of Heathens, who certainly will rise up in judgment one day against these men, that sell us for slaves in our own Land.

3. It is irrationall: reason being the fountain of honest Lawes, gives to every man propriety and liberty: propriety of interest, freedome of enjoyment and improvement to his own advantage: from that propriety take away freedom and a considerable part is gone: nay, we see it by experience, that those who have bereft us of our liberty, have made bold with our propriety: and indeed, if Prerogative may take away the one; why not the other (from the same principles?) So that it appeares to be rationall, that every native who hath propriety of goods, wares, & merchandize, hath freedome to transport them to any Port beyond Seas, and there convert them to his own profit, it being his true and proper inheritance so to doe. It is very strange to my understanding, that one man should doe the work, and another man receive the wages; I mean, that the honest Clothier who has toyled much in the making of his cloth, shall not have the benefit to sell it here for his own gain, or to ship it for more profit; but being debarred of freedom in both, must make sale to them, in whose power it is to give him what price they please, whereby he is cheated of the fruit of his labour.

4. That the Monopoly is against the honour of the Nation; because by it the people are put in a condition of vassalage in their own country. It takes away industry the spring of wealth, the hearts of the people being brought to servility; and not able by reason of this, and other the like Patents, to imploy themselves, cannot chuse but procure sad effects, if not timely prevented; For

5. The Patent was illegally procured by the solicitation of evill Councellors, under the Broad Seal of England, in the 21. year of the Raign of Queen Elizabeth; it bring of no longer standing, under spectous pretences, as the profit of her then Majesty, the good of the Kingdom, &c. whereas by it, the Natives have been weakned and spolyed, which will easily appear, if we consider these particulars.

1. By reason of this Patent, thousands of poor people are in a condition of beggery, who otherwise might maintain themselvs in honest Callings, by the making of cloath, and other woollen manufactures, by Carding, Spinning, Weaving, &c. And certainly, this one thing throughly considered, should stirre up the bowels of every truly-noble spirited Englishman to double his strength if it were possible, an hundred fold, in all just wayes, for the remomovall of so great an obstruction.

2. The poore Clothier suppressed, none being to trade to those parts but the Company, THE CLOTHIER MAKES NOT HALF THE CLOATHES HE MIGHT: and for those he doth make, they being of a confederacy, and having all the priviledge of buying in their own hands; by reason whereof, many times he is forced to sell them at a farre lesse price then they cost him in making, or else to keep them till the next year, which discourages and slackens the Clothier in the prosecution of his calling, and causes some to fail, others to give over, and those which remain many of them scarce can make a living.

3. This Monopoly greatly impaireth the trade of Cloth: those who are judicious, affirme, that 5000. Cloathes more then are, would be made, shipped, and expended yearly in those parts to which they are authorised to trade to; which I verily beleeve, and prove thus: All the cloth they ship, some extraordinary times excepted, is but to one or two Townes, and there residing their Factors, who making sale to the Burger, hee sendeth the cloth up & down the Countrey, whence ariseth many mischiefs, the countries not being furnished as they should, as also the selling at such encessive rates, causeth the Dutch to make cloath in an abundant manner, and to be satisfied with it, though it be exceeding course. And again, there being divers Kingdomes, Dominions, Dukedomes, Countries, Cities, and Townes, to which by their Patent they are licenced, what advantage would the young merchant have, having so vast a compasse, how active would hee be from Town to Town, from Citie to Citie, from one Countrey to another, and SELLING CHEAP, would invite forraigne parties to set a true estimate upon our native commodities. And certainly were trade free, Swordland and Pomerland would vent much cloath; whereas the Company is not able to satisfie Eastland it selfe, by reason of the smallnesse of their stock; it may be easily conceived, that such a small company of Private men, are never able to suffice such famous Kingdomes and Dukedomes to which they onely are licansed to traffick.

6. It causeth a great decay of Navigation, which sustaineth the Mariners, so that by this and other the like Parents, the Saylorie greatly supprest.

7. It obstructeth Returnes, divers of the most staple commodities which our countrey stands in need of, are imported by then, viz. Flax, Hemr, Pot-ashes, Pitch, Tarre, Course Linnen, Packing Canvas, with divers other very considerable merchandize: now they bring over when they please, and what they please, and sell at what price they please, which cannot but have sundry evill concomitance. 1. Our Country is not satisfied with that variety and conveniency it should: and 2. By reason the Citizen gives such an unreasonable rate to the Merchant, the poore have all excessive deare, giving halfe as much more then the commodity is worth, or then it would be sold for, were the trade but open, from which and such other dealings it is, that the people are unconscionably wasted and weakned: and threfore what &illegible; it cost us, lets have this ravenous patent down: whereby there would be all these six gallant effects. 1. Multitudes of poor maintained. 2. The Clothier raised. 3. The trade of cloath greatly augmented, by reasons that thousands might be vented more then are. 4. The number of Merchants increased. 5. The Art of Navigation furthered. 6. And lastly, an universall benefit to the whole nation, from the plenty of merchandize imported, which we should have at farre easier and more valuable considerations.

Object. But it trade be free, the Alien will expect freedome also.

Answ. I see no ground but aliens paying custome, provided alwayes that wee enjoy as full and large priviledges with them, they ought to have the like here with us. But secondly, suppose the State should prohibit strangers, yet there is no shadow, or colour of right reason, that we who have equall liberties in the lawes, have &illegible; our estates & lives so freely, to preserve them, should be deprived of our true inheritance: & therfore for further satisfaction, I shall here insert part of their Charter, that every one may judge whether it be just or no. “Forasmuch as we be credibly informed, &c. that you our Subjects, Merchants and others, exercising and using the &illegible; and seat of Merchandise, out and from any our Dominions through the Sound, into the Realmes, Kingdomes, Dominions, Dukedomes, Countries, Cities and Townes of Norway, Swethia, Poland, and the territories of the same Kingdomes: as also into &illegible; and Liestand, under the dominion of the King of Pole, Prussia, and also Pomerland, from the river of Odera Eastward, and also &illegible; and Revill in Liestand aforesaid, Kingsbrough, Elbinge, Brownsbrough, and Dansick in Brusia, Copenhaven and Elsenore in Dansk: except the Nerve, and the territories thereof belonging: as also into the Island of Finland, Goteland, Eweland, and Burntholme within the Sound aforesaid, by one consent are willing to gather, and assemble your selves into one fellowship, and to be one body incorporate and politick, in deed and in name; Wee considering that your purposes in this behalf are very laudable, doe therefore not onely approve and ratifie the same, but will you to persevere in your good minds and purposes, to the establishment and perfection thereof, and earnestly desiring that our Merchants and their successors haunting the said Kingdomes, Dominions, Countries, Cities and Townes before mentioned, or any of them, for merchandize, in and through the “Sound of the Kingdome of Denmark (except before excepted) may from henceforth profit and increase as prosperously as any Merchants of this land have aforetime increased and profited: And do grant for us, our heires and successors, that from henceforth there be and shall be of the said fellowship, one GOVERNOR, one DEPUTY, or DEPUTIES, and foure and twenty ASSISTANTS of the said fellowship, and that they, or the major part of them may make Statutes, Lawes and Ordinances; and that the aforesaid Governor, or Deputie, or Deputies, and their successors, or the major part of them, as is aforesaid then present, as often as need shall be; the said Statutes, Lawes and Ordinances, shall and may execute and put in execution as well within our Realme of England, as within the said Realmes, Dominions, Cities & Countries, and every of them. And for that divers persons, our subjects, being not brought up in Merchandize, through their ignorance and &illegible; of knowledge, commit many inconveniencies, we willing to resist and prevent them, and intending to further the expert Merchant in their lawfull and honest trade: Will and by “our Regall authority we command, and also prohibit and forbid by these presents, that no subject of us, our heires, or successors, which is not, nor shall be by force of these presents, made free of the said Fellowship, shall by any maner of means at any time hereafter, intermeddle in the trade of Merchandize; or by any means buy and sell, or use any traffick into the said parts of Eastland, and countries aforesaid, or any of them, (except before excepted) upon pain to incurre our indignation: as also to pay such fines and, amencements, and to suffer imprisonment, and such other pains due to the transgressors of of the said statutes, ordinances and constitutions of the said fellowship, or to the said Governor or his Deputy and assistants aforesaid, shall seem meet and convenient, any law, statute, custome, or ordinance to the contrary thereof, many other things notwithstanding, &c.

And do further by these presents inhibit and forbid all and “every our subjects, & the subjects of us, our heirs & successors, not being licensed and authorized by vertue of these presents, to traffick in and to the said Countries, Kingdomes, Towns and places before recited, or use any manner of trade in or to them, contrary to the tenor of these presents, upon pain to incurre the displeasure of us, our heirs, and successors, and to be fined, pained, and imprisoned, according to the severall discretions and lawes of the Officers of the said former severall Companies and their successors. Withesse our self at Westminster the 17. day of August in, in the 21. year of our reign.

I no sooner made a survey of this cruell engine, what intellerable breaches and in-rodes it hath continually made upon us, but was cast into a sildden admiration, that so free a people as England should suffer themselves so violently to be ground to powder, which I shall illustrate to be treasonable in the practisers of it, by these Positions, 1. It to surrender a Castle by the Captain of that Castle, through feare and cowardize, and not from any compliance with the enemy, be treason; as was adjudged in the Parliament, 1 Rich. 2. Then is this a treasonable Patent: For besides the place, there is onely a losse of the adjacent parts, but by this Patent our Lawes, Liberties, nay, our very Lives, in pursuance of both the former, are subjected to will and tyrannie, he that walkes in the exercise of freedome, according to Law, is subject to their counter-commands, and to be fined payned, and imprisoned, and to suffer such other punishments, as to them shall seeme meet and convenient.

If to kill a Judge upon the Bench be treason, because of malice, not to the person, but to the Law; then is this a treasonable Pattent; here is not only a malice to the Law, but a most butcherly weapon-killing and destroying of it. These two cannot dwell together; for the life of the parent, so fat as it extends, is the death of the Law, which stops its free course for the benefit of the people, and makes it meerly a dead letter, a carkas without a soule, a power being given to Mr. Governour and his companions, to make Lawes, Statutes, and Ordinances; which power is more, and far greater, then belongs to the chiefe Magistrate to give, or can legally or justly be exercised by any but the Parliament; and therefore not to be received by any person or persons whatsoever, and certainly those Laws, & all that Government derived from Queen Elizabeths Broad Seal Commission, are according to the lusts of these men, being extra judiciall, in that they are above the Sphere of the Law.

Secondly, Contrary to the Law, if the endeavouring the subversion of the antient Fundamentall Lawes and Government of this Kingdome, and to introduce an arbytrary and tyrannicall Government be treason, as was adjudged in the case of the Earl of Strafford, and in the case of Sir Robert Berkly, by the first Article of impeachment by the House of Commons, July 6, 1641. then is this a treasonable patent; for here is not only an indeavour, but an actuall surrender of both Law and Government, which have made England a free people; and what more ancient or fundamentall, then those Laws which gratifie the Commons; and by which they enjoy their very lives: Here is an arbytrary Government introduced, and put into the hands of those whom the subject doth not owne to have any right of power & rule; and that in so high a nature, as can be no lesse then Monarchicall; for what can a Monarchicall power be, but to make lawes, and to punish the transgressors according to those lawes, by confiscation of goods, imprisonment, or taking away the life of the vassals: All which, they do by their patents and certainly this company of Merchants of East-land, who have practised arbytrarily for so long a &illegible; as they have done, against the liberties of the natives, deserve for all their cruelties to be proceeded against as publike Delinquents to the State.

3. As touching their Oath, it is &illegible; of the &illegible; (I am confident) that ever was made, which I shal here insert for every mans knowledge.

YOu shall swear to be good and true to our Soveraign Lord the Kings Majesty, and to his Heires and Successors. you shall be obedient and assistant to Mr. Governour, his Deputy and Deputies, and Assistants of Merchants of East-land. All Statutes and Ordinances, which bee, or shall be made by the said Governor, or by his Deputies, and Assistants standing in force; You shall truly hold and keepe, having no singular regard to your self, in hurt or prejudice of the Common-wealth of the said Fellowship; You shall heale, and not bewray: and if you shall know any manner of Person or Persons, which intend any hurt, harme, or prejudice to our said Soveraign Lord the Kings Majesty, or unto his Land, or to the foresaid Fellowship or Priviledges of the same, you shall give knowledge thereof, and do it to be known to the said Governour, or his Deputy; and you shall not colour or free any Forraigners Goods not free of the said Fellowship: All which you shall hold and keep to the uttermost of your power, or else being justly condemned for making default in any of the premises you shall truly from time to time, being orderly demanded, content & pay to the Treasurer of this Company for the time being, all and every such mulcts and penalties which have been or shall be limitted, and set for the Trangressors of the same.

So God you helpe.

Lieutenant Col. Lilburn, in his late book, called Innocencie and Truth justified, being an Answer to Mr. Pryns book, called the Lyar confounded, hath these passages, pag. 53. And in the second place, seeing they know, viz. the Merchant-Adventurers, That the Petition of Right doth condemn the King and his Privie Councell, for making and administring of Oaths not made by COMMON CONSENT OF PARLIAMENT; and seeing the Parliament, as they very well know, was lately so angry at the Bishops and their Convocation, for &illegible; to themselves the boldnesse to make an Oath, although they were invested with a more colourable authority to justifie them therein, then these can pretend; how exemplary ought the punishment of these men to be for their impudence and boldnesse, after the knowledge of all this, to force and prasse upon the free-men of England, an Oath of their own framing and making, and to keep their freedomes from them? because, out of Conscience they dare not take them, which at this present day is the condition of one Mr. JOHNSON, late servant to Mr. WHITLOCK, one of the beast-Country Monopolizing Merchants, which is all one in nature with the Monopoly of Merchant Adventurers: And not onely do they most unjustly keep my freedome from me, for which I have so often ventured my life in the Northern service this present wars, and to which, I was born by the Law; although I have served 7. years according to the Custome of the City of London, but most inhumanely have taken from me my place of Factorship in the East-land; and all, because I have rejected their Monopoly and Diabolicall Oath: and this was the gallant service of Mr. Burnel Governour, and his Associates the 3. Octob. 1645. but I expect to see Justice (that banished exile) return in all her glory, and these oppressing task-masters called to a just account: For certain I am, that the Law never gave them authority to make an Oath, or to force it upon my Conscience; besides, the Oath containeth many perjuries, in the second branch it ties the swearer to be assistant to Mr. Governour, and his Confederates, in all their dishonest proceedings.

In the third Branch, to keepe all their pernicious Lawes and Ordinances; which Lawes and Ordinances are to deprive the Subject of his right; and this will not satisfie, but to all that are to be made: O intollerable burthend whither will this bottomlesse pit go? here is &c. &c. &c. and innumerable company of &c. In the fourth branch; to keepe all their cozening secrets, and under-hand dealings in the pursuance of their patent.

And in the fifth branch, for making default in any of the premises; that is, for forswearing himself, which he doth that keeps it, aswell as he that keeps it not, because he swears not in truth, in judgment, and in righteousnesse, to pay such mulcts and penalties which have been or shall be limitted and set for the transgressors of the same, as if such great crimes could be washed away with a pennance: for my part I am clear in this point, that whosoever he bee that bends and yeelds obedience to this or the like Oath, deserves not the name of an Englishman: Surely, their designes are (to use the expression of Lieutenant-Colonel Lilburn, in page the 54. of his book, speaking against the Merchant-Adventurers) to make England a Land of slavery, ignorance, and beggery, or else a Land of perjury.

I have now learned the meaning of the Scripture, Rev. 13. 16, 17. And he causeth all both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads, that time might buy or sell, save he that had the marke, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name: which relates, as I conceive, to all Monopolies whatsoever, Jublata causa tollitur effectus, take but away these Merchants patents, and all other of the like nature; and there will a sudden way appear to the relief of the honest, comfort and tranquility to the whole Nation: for the effecting wherof, if I shall but irritate the courteous Reader, it is price sufficient for him whose desire it is not to live, but in the truth.

Thomas Johnson.

But for the further evincing of the illegality of these Patentee-Monopolies, I shall here insert a case upon the Statute of Monopolies, which was made and resolved by an able and learned Lawyer & who had not a little share in the framing & contriving of the said Statute: which case thus followeth:

IN the 21. year of the raign of Queen Elizabeth, divers Merchants of the City of London obtained a Grant by Letters-Pattents from the said Queen, whereby they are incorporate by a speciall name, prout, &c. and made a Body politique to have perpetuall succession; with a Grant, that they and their Successors may use the traffique and feat of Merchandize, out, of, and from any her Majesties Dominions, through the SOVND into SWETHIA, POLAND, and other COVNTRIES: which Corporation is commonly called the EAST-LAND COMPANY, with a Clause in the said Letters Pattents; that none but they themselves, and such as they shall think fit (for such Fines and Compositions as they shall impose, and in such manner and forme as they shal direct and allow of) shall trade or traffique through the said SOVND into the said parts of SWETHIA or POLAND, &c.

In the 20. year of King CHARLES I.S. being a Merchant, Citizen, and Free-man of the said City of London, but not a member, nor free of the said Incorporation, nor of the said Eastland Company, provideth English commodities of good and merchantable cloth, well and sufficiently wrought, dressed and dyed, and shippeth, or really offereth to ship the same, to be carryed from the Port and City of London aforesaid, by way of trade, traffique, and merchandize, through the said SOVND to Dantzick in Poland and maketh, or offereth to make, reall and due entry thereof in the Custome-house of the Port of London aforesaid; and to pay all Customes, and other duties and fees any way payable by Law, for or in respect of the shipping or entring, therof.

J. N. by, upon, and in pursuance of a Warrant or Command from the said Incorporation of Merchants, or Eastland Company, forbiddeth the said J. S. and the Officers of, and in the said Custome house, to make entry of the said goods, of, or for the coquetting or customing of the same, and forbiddeth the Master & Marriners of the ship, wherein the same should be laden or laid aboard, from taking or stowing them aboard in the said ship.

The said J. S. persisting neverthelesse in his endeavour duly to enter his said goods, and to coquet and custome the same, as to law appertaineth.

The said I.N. by pretext of some Warrant, or command from the said Incorporation, or Eastland Company of Merchants, grounded upon their Grant and Letters-Pattents aforesaid, seizeth upon, taketh, carrieth away, and detaineth the said goods, against the will of the said I.S. and will not let it passe in the course of trade, nor restore the same to him, upon, and after reasonable request thereof made.

The question is, whether the said I. S. may as a party grieved, have his speciall action, upon the Stat. of 21. Iac. chap. 3. concerning Monopolies, against the said, I. N. and recover his treble dammages, and double costs; yea, or no.

Vpon carefull perufall of the said Statute, as well the inducement or recitall thereof, as the body of the same, and the ten severall Provisoes therein contained; I am of opinion, that the said I. S. may have his Action upon the said Statute against the said I. N. and that he may, and ought to recover his treble dammages, and double costs, according to the purport of the same Statute.

My Reasons are as followeth:

First, I hold the said Letters-Pattents of 21. Eliz: for so much thereof, as concerneth the restraine of the Merchants, being Freemen of this Realm, from lawfull trading at their pleasures; to bee a Monopoly, or matter tending to the instituting, erecting, furthering, or countenancing of the sole using of a thing within this Realme, by some men within this Realm, excluding others having right to use the same, which is a Monopoly, or tending towards the same; and so was and is void, by force of the common Law, without the helpe of this Statute, which doth not in this point introduce or make a new Law; but only declareth, vindicateth, and confirmeth the ancient Lawes of the Land, by Judgment of the Parliament; as appeareth by the words of the said Statute in many places: namely, in the inducement to the body of the Act: in which inducement, it is recited; that the Declaration of King James, in 1610. (That all Grants of Monopolies were contrary to his Majesties Lawes) is consonant and agreeable to the ancient and fundamentall Lawes of this Realm.

And in the body of the Act, the word [declared] is put before the word [enacted.]

And the principall words of the Act run thus, viz.

That Monopolies, and all Commissions, Grants, Licences, Charters, and Letters Pattents, made, or to be made, of, or for the sole using of any thing within the Realm, and all Proclamations, Restraints Warrants of Assistances, and all other matters and things whatsoever, any way tending as aforesaid, are ALTOGETHER contrary to the Lawes of this Realm, and so are, and shall be utterly void, and of none effect, and in no wise to be put in ure or execution.

Which said leading words, viz. That they are contrary to the lawes; and the said conclusive words, viz. and so (that is, in true sence; because they are contrary to the Lawes) they are void; do manifestly shew, that without the help of this Law, the said Letters Pattents and all others of like nature were void. And the declaratory part of the stattutes was made only for the better enlightning of weaker judgments, or to arme the Ministers of Justice with confidence and security, to deliver and adjudge the Law in such particulars of this nature, as might after come in question against the importunity of powerfull Courtiers, when there was a direct written text of Statute-Law, which they might insist upon more perspicuous then the fundamentall common-law, and generall good custome of the Realm was, while being unwritten, it rested onely in the breasts of those who are the dispensers of it, every Judicatory in its proper turn.

After the Declaratory part of the said Statute, followeth the new provisionall introductive part of it; whereby (omitting purposely in this place, the word declared) it is further enacted, That if any person shall be hindered, grieved, disturbed, or disquieted, or his, or their goods, or chattels any way seized, attached, distrained, taken, carryed away, or detained by occasion or pretext of any Monopoly, or of any such Commission, Grant, Licence, Power, Liberty, Faculty; Letters-Pattents, Proclamation, Inhibition, Restraint, Warrant of Assistance, or other matter or thing tending as aforesaid (as in &illegible; said Act is mentioned) and will sue to be relievedin or for any the premises; That then, and in every such case, the same person and persons shall and may have his and their remedy for the same at the common-law in the Kings-Bench, Common-Pleas or Exchequer, by any Action or Actions, to be ground upon this Statute against him by whom he shall be so hindered, &c. or by whom his goods shall be so seized, &c. and recover TREBLE DAMMAGES and DOVBLE COSTS.

And in such suite as for the staying thereof, no priviledge, injunction, or order of &illegible; shall be prayed, granted admitted, or allowed, nor any more then one impadance, with a Clause of præmunirs, pro ut, &c.

And by this Clause, in the next place I observe clearly, that the said I. S. as the case is put, is to have his speciall action upon the said Statute against the said I. N. to recover his treble dammages, and double costs, and is not to be hindered from his proceeding by any priviledge, or order of restraint, &c. In case the 5. of the 10. provisoes in the said Act contained, do not sufficiently extend to attempt the said J.S. or his case, out of the declaratory part, and out of the new provisionall and introductive part of the said Statute.

The &illegible; words of the said fifth provisoe, are onely these, viz.

“Provided also, and it is hereby further intended, declared and enacted; that this Act, or any thing therein contained, shall not extend or be prejudiciall to the City of London, for, or concerning any Grants, Charters, or Letters-Pattents, to them made or granted or for, or concerning any custome or customes, used by &illegible; the same, or unto any Corporations, Companies, or Fellowships, of any Art, Trade, Occupation, or Mystery, or to any Companies, or Societies of Merchants within this Realm erected for the maintenance, enlargement, or ordering of any Trade or Merchandize: But that the same Charters, Customers, Corporations, Companies, Fellowships, and Societies, and their &illegible; and priviledges, powers and immunities, shall be and continue of such force and effect, as they were BEFORE THE MAKING OF THIS ACT, and of none other, any thing before in this Act contained to the contrary, in any wise notwithstanding.

And it seemeth to me, that this fifth Proviso doth neither in words nor in meaning exempt the said I. S. or his case, out of, or from the Declaratory part, or out of, or from the Provisionall and Introductive part of the said Statute: Because as to the Declaratory part, the said proviso being repugnãt to the body of the act, must needs be, & is, in true cõstruction of law, utterly void, as being therein totally repugnant to the declaratory part of the body of the Statute. For to say that all Monopolies and all Grants of such and such natures, are void by law, and yet to conclude that a particular Monopoly or Grant for sole using of a thing, &c. which by Law is a Monopoly, and so declared, is neuerthelesse no Monopoly, or is not void, is irreconcileably repugnant, and consequently the said Proviso, or Exception, being of such repugnant nature, as aforesaid, is in Law void.

And if it be objected by way of question, Why then was the Proviso inserted? The true & sufficient answer is easie, namely, That it was inserted to secure the city & Merchants who it did or might concern of thus much (which was all the right that was intended them) That if their Charters or Customes were in all, of in part good and valid in Law, before the making of this Statute; then in the points of such their forte and validity, this Statute should not make them worse; but leave them as they were before.

And whereas it may be objected, That though the said Proviso cannot exempt them out of the Declaratory Premises and body of the Act, yet it might exempt them from the new provisionall and Introductive part of the Act, namely, from being liable to treble dammages, and double costs, and from incurring the paines, penalties, and forfeitures of the Statute of Provision and Premunire, and that the said proviso shall take effect to this purpose, as by law it may, rather then be rejected as utterly void, & impertinent; I conceive neverthelesse, that this objection is of little force, because there was neither meaning in the Law-makers so to exempt them, nor are there any words in the Act expressing their intention so to bee, as appeareth by the very act it selfe, (the best expositor of the true meaning of it selfe) in comparing this proviso with the other parts and provisoes of and in the said act; which are differently penned from this proviso, and thereby doe shew the different meaning of the Law-makers in and concerning the Subject matter of this, and the subject matter of the said other Provisoes.

For the 6. 7, 8. 9. and 10. provisoes in the said act, are penned with apt and strong words in the beginning of every of “them, That it is provided and enacted that the said act, or any penalty or forfeiture before mentioned, shal not extend to Letters patents, or grants concerning Printing, Salt-peter, Gunpowder, casting or making of Ordnance, shot for Ordnance, Offices erected then in being, and not decryed, Allum, Allummines, the fellowship of the Hoastmen of Nowcastle upon Tyne, the licencing of Tavernes, the making of glasse, the transportation of Calves-skins, the making of sinalt, and the melting of Iron-ore with Sea-cole or pit-cole. All which last mentioned provisoes, except onely the eighth, doe conclude with words, That the said excepted letters Patents, and grants shall be as free from the provisions, penalties, & forfeitures contained in the said act, as if the said act had never been had or made; whereas the said fifth proviso hath no such apt or effectuall words either in the beginning or conclusion thereof. And though it be true, that the words in the beginning of the fifth proviso, are, “That the act, or any thing therein contained shall not extend or be prejudiciall to the Citie of London, or to such grants or letters patents, or that proviso referreth unto, which are large enough to exempt them from all provisions, disablements, penalties and forfeitures in the said act, as the same are pureell of, and contained in the said act; yet the word [prejudiciall] annexed to that word [extend] and the words in the conclusion of the said fifth proviso, which are of an explanatory and qualifying nature, doe so reconcile the said proviso to the body of the act, that upon the whole matter it is evident, the said Grants and Letters patents, by the meaning of the Law makers well couched, yet fully expressed in their words, are by the said proviso so and in such sort onely excepted from prejudice by the extent of the body of the Act thereunto, that they shal be and continue of such force and effect in law, and of none other, as they were before the making of the said act, which was just none at all in law, and therefore are now in every respect utterly void in law, (being by this act left without any Cloke, or Fig-leafe covers) any provision in the said act to the contrary notwithstanding: but not to be free from the declarations, penalties and forfeitures in the act contained, as if the act had never been had or made. For, to be of force as they were before the Act, is one thing, and to be as free as if the Act had never been, is another thing. And it is not to be conceived; that the said several provisoes in the said act contained, came to be so differently penned by meer accident, but by deliberate & wel-advised purpose, which is very cõsiderable for the true interpretatio of the said act For if the words [or be prejudiciall] be not explanatory, they are void & superfluous: for the word [shall not extend] was sufficient to except the intended grants and Letters Patents, out of the provision of the body of the Act to all purposes, if so large exception had been intended, as it was not; and therefore the words (or be prejudiciall) which are subjoyned, must needs be explanatory, or qualilifying, rather then rejected as utterly void: and then the true sense of both words united in right construction, is, That the provisions of the Statute shall not extend to the said grants, or Letters patents, to due unto them, or bring upon them any prejudice, that is, any wrong* by taking away the good or valid part thereof, or by making them of lesse force or effect then they were before the Statute, which had been a prejudice or wrong unto them; but no prejudice or wrong is done to the Letters patents, by giving a large and good remedie to parties grieved by offences to be done by colour of the ineffectuall parts, or clauses of such Grants, or Letters patents, which were void from the beginning. And note, this is not a popular and penall law in this point, but onely a Law conferring reliefe upon parties grieved, and to be largely interpreted accordingly.

And whereas it may be objected, That in the said Act there are foure other provisoes precedent to the said proviso &illegible; London, and the Societies and Companies of Merchants of this Realm, erected for the maintenance, enlargement, or ordering of trade, or Merchandize, for the excepting thereof, out of, &illegible; from the said act, or out of or from the declarations, of and in the said Act, which in the entrance into the said provisoes, or at the conclusion thereof, have no words to except the particulars in those provisoes specified or described from the provisions, penalties, & forfeiture, is contained in the body or purview of the said act; yet it were hard to think such persons as by pretext of letters patents, or grants of the King, or his predecessors in that behalfe made with clauses in them (peradventure) restraining all men without the consent of the Patentees, or their assignes, from exercising such particulars, should hinder men from their trade, in such sort onely as before the making of the said Statute they used without controll to doe, should onely for so hindering or disquieting a man, or for seizing or taking away of his goods after the said Statute bee exposed to an action or suit, wherein they should be liable to pay treble dammages, and double costs.

It is by way of distinction to be answered; “That if the makers of the law had so intended, they would have used the like words in this fifth proviso, as they did in foure of the five last provisoes, and their not using the same, importeth strongly that they meant noo any such matter. Also, the conclusion of the said fifth proviso being (as in effect) I have noted before, with an explanatory clause, viz. that the said Letters patents, &c. concerning such Societies and Companies of Merchants, should be & continue of such force & effect as they were before, & of none other. Their force and effect before the Statute, was, that they were good to incorporate the said Societies and Companies of Merchants, and of effect also to enable them to have perpetuall succession, and to make ordinances and constitutions, not repugnant to the law of the Realm; which no Corporation in England can doe, no not London it selfe, as Sir Edward Cook affirms in the fourth part of his Institutes, fol. 249. and chap. 50. And therefore &illegible; those Ordinances, &illegible; and Orders made by the Court of &illegible; and Common Councell of London, or by any of the Brotherhoods, or Patentee-Mynopolizing Corporations of Drapers, &illegible; Grocers, Cloath-workers, and Merchants of what &illegible; soever, &illegible; &illegible; contrary to the known, universall, and fundamentall law of the land, are absolutely and utterly void, and not in the lest to be obeyed, and punishable is he that shall put them in execution, and ought to bee reputed an enemy to the Lawes and Liberties of England; with other legall benefits, and of such force and effect they still are, by the declaratory operation of the said proviso; wherewith, the said proviso is aptly and fully satisfied, and no need to extend the same to exempt persons offending (by colour of such Grants, or Letters Patents, out of, and from the penalties or forfeitures inflicted by the act, by pretext of the illegall part of such letters Patents and Grants, the rather for that this is a beneficiall law, made for the good of the Common-wealth, and FOR FREEDOME AND LIBERTY OF TRADE, and of the free Subjects of the Realm in that behalfe: and therefore is to be largely interpreted for advancement of the generall remedy intended; and strictly to be interpreted in all points and particulars tending to abridge or restrain that good remedy. Also there are two main differences betwixt the said fifth proviso, and the foure first provisoer in the said Act. For the first two of the said four provisoes, concerning letters patents of priviledge, have in them these words, the first of them, that the said Declarations in the act should not extend to such letters Patents formerly made; & the second of them, to such letters Patents futurely made concerning the sole makong or working of new Manufactures to the first and true inventers thereof for a reasonable time of 21. yeares, or under, for such Letters Patents granted before the Statute; or for fourteen yeares, or under, to bee granted after the Statute: fourteen yeares being but the common time of two ordinary Apprentiships. Which kind of letters Patents granted as a just reward to the proper person or his assignes for and in respect of a meer new and good invention, not mischievous to the State, nor hurtfull to Trade, nor generally inconvenient, was never counted an illegal monopoly. And therefore being qualified, as in the said provisoes, and limited to the tearms of 21. and 14. yeares, as aforesaid, were not repugnant to the Declaratory part, or main body of the Statute, but wel consistent with the same, being reconcileable and reconciled by reasonable construction; whereas the Leters Patents and Grants in the said fifth proviso, are perpetuall: and so farre as they tend to RESTRAN FREE TRADE, and to appropriate it solely to some few persons, are MISCHIEVOUS MONOPOLIES, hurtfull to the State, generally inconvenient, and by the said provisoe not limitted to have continuance for any time or number of 21. or 14. yeares, or other terme whatsoever, nor otherwise in any sort, consistent with the body of the Act, and therefore either the Act must be Void, or the said provisoe, which being so, it followeth by the cleare rule for the construction of Statutes, that the said 5. provisoe, and not the body of the Act, is to be rejected as repugnant and voyd.

Touching the third provisoe, it is of so particular and speciall a nature, that no argument can be drawne from the words, or from the manner or forme thereof, towards the construction of the said 5. provisoe; for the said third provisoe is onely concerning priviledges, powers, or authorities formerly granted by Act of Parliament, which (not being unlawfull in the creation) however they might tend to give the sole using of some things to some particular persons, because they were erected by act of Parliament, to which all men in Law being parties are in Law concluded & bound thereby, alwayes provided they be not contrary to the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome, for the Parliament by their own confession are chosen and trusted by us to provide for our weale but not for our woe, Book. Declar. pag. 150. and therefore all the ordinances and orders of late unduly obtained from the present Parliament, by the Turky Merchants, Merchant-Adventurers, Greenland Merchants, or any other whatsoever; for the hindering of every free Englishman to trade into any place whatsoever beyond the Seas, or for the sole ingrossing it into the hands of such and such men, is altogether contrary to the just fundamentall Lawes of the Land, and so altogether illegall, unbinding, and ought not in the least to be obeyed, and I know no reason but the executers of them may as justly be put to death at Traytors, for indeavoring the subversion of the fundamentall Lawes of the Land, as Justice Empson, and Justice Dudley, were in the first yeare of Hen. 8. Speed. fol. 978. 983. Martin fol. 353. 355. 356. For their oppressions, and innovating cruelties, exercised upon the bodies and goods of many of the freemen of England, by coullor of an unjust and illegall Act of Parliament made in the 11. yeare of H. 7. Chap. 3. which Law, saith learned, Sir Edward Cooke in the second part of his institutes fol. 51. was made against the ancient and just fundamentall Law of the 29. Chapter of Magna Charta, yea in the very face of it, and therefore he calles it (though an Act of Parliament) an unjust and injurious Act, so that a Parliament cannot de jure do what they please, although de facto sometimes they do it, which is most unjust in them so to doe.

This third provisoe was inserted in caution lest this latter generall declaratory Act being contrary to such former particular Acts, qualified as before should amount to a repeale thereof; which by the makers of this law was not intended; and this provisoe inserted to make due provision according to such their true meaning.

And touching the 4. provisoe concerning privy Seales, enabling Judges in certaine cases to compound, it relateth not at all to that part of this Act concerning Monopolies, but to the other part of it, which concerneth the dispensation with penall Lawes, and the forfeitures thereof; as by the distinct parts of the Act, reddendo singula singulis, doth manifestly appeare, whereby no argument can be drawne from the matter or words, or from the manner or forme of this provisoe, towards the construing of the said 5. prouisoe, which onely relateth to, and concerneth that part of the Act, which treateth of Monopolies. And therefore upon the whole matter for the reasons aforesaid, I am of opinion, that the said letters-pattents of 21. Eliz. and all such like are within the compasse of the said Act, and thereby in the body of the same, declared to be a Monopoly, and are not by the said 5. provisoe, excepted or preserved from or against the provision, penalties, or forfeitures of and in the said Act contained; But that the said I. S. MAY HAVE SVCH ACTION FOR TREBLE DAMMAGES AND DOVBLE COSTS AS AFORESAID.

Having unto this paraphrase upon the Statute of Monopolies, joyned some Marginall notes of my own, the better to cleare some things contained in it; I shall heere insert you Mr. William Sycks his most excellent Remonstrance to the Parliament, delivered with his own hands to the Members thereof, in March 1645. immediately after he, and Mr. Thomas Iohnson Merchant had delivered a most excellent and gallant Petition to them, the Copy of which you may reade in my late printed booke, called Londons Liberty in Chaines discovered, pag. 43. 44. 45. and the end wherefore I insert this Remonstrance here, is because I hope thereby to provoke you especially; (O ye Barrons, or Commons of London) to revive his Remonstrance againe, that so you your selves, may be instruments to procure unto your selves, and your posterities, that extraordinary benefit (and inrichment to this whole Kingdome) free trade and trafick, which he (though free of the Merchant-Adventurers Corporation) with so much true zeale, honesty, and importunate earnestnesse, laboured to procure for you, but could not.

Onely this I must tell you, he followed it so close that by his meanes Collonel Alexander Rigby, that heroicall, true, and cordiall lover of his Country, had prepared to my knowledge the draught of an Ordinance, for ever to distroy all Monopolies, and absolutely to set Trade free, but for want of more helps then he had, could not then get it on in the House, which by a new Petition from you (so many gallant and honest new Members being chosen since into the House) now he easily may: Therefore for your own good and benefit as well as for the generall good and benefit of the whole Kingdome, and all our posterities, I wish all earnestnesse and &illegible; in &illegible; you wish the strength of zeal, and resolved resolution, forthwith unanimously to petition for the &illegible; of free Trade, and destroying of all illigall Monopolies of What kind soever, and also for the severe and exemplary punishment of all (the &illegible; especially) that have exercised them: that so the Generations to come may be terrified from the indeavouring the destruction of the fundamentall, and rationall established Law and Liberties of England.

To the Right Honorable the high Court of Parliament;

The humble Remonstrance of VVilliam Sykes Merchant, for free Trade in transporting & importing of lawfull and needfull commodities.

VVHereas of late the Remonstrant, and Thomas Johnson Merchant, for themselves, and on the behalfe of all the free-men of England, did petition both Houses of Parliament for Free Trade; which they are confident is the Common-wealths BIRTH-RIGHT, and reperations for wrongs done by those Ingrossers and Monopolizers, who by vertue of Patents, have been, and are sellers of that hereditable right, as the Company of Merchant-Adventurers have done to Citizens for 100. l. a man, and to Countrey people for 50. l. a man. The like may be said of the Company of East-countrey Merchants’, Muscovia Merchants, Turkie Merchants, and other Companies of Merchants, who have for a long time practised this way of trade-selling, and Monopolizing, to the great grievance of the people, and detriment to FREE TRADE, both at home and abroad.

Which Petition was presented to most Members of both Houses, and dispersed into the severall Counties of England, that this honorable Court may no longer delay the discharge of their trust, but speedily improve their power to rescue FREE TRADE from such Liberty-destroyers and Trade-ingrossers, and that the people may the better know for what end and purpose they have adventured their lives and estates in these present warres.

Yet the said Petition is not so much as publickly read in either House of Parliament, far lesse debated or answered, though the Common-wealth be so much concerned in it, as in nothing more, if the people knew their right and freedome, which this present Parliament hath confirmed, by the confirmation of Magna Charta, and by the executing of justice on the Earle of Strafford for his exercising arbitrary government against the freedome of England; therefore the Remonstrant doth conceive, that hee is bound in duty to follow the said petition with this Remonstrance, which he was emboldned to present for these two ensuing reasons, and to answer some objections, referring the conclusion to a serious resolution.

Reas. 1. The first reason is drawn from the second Table of Gods Law, which commands us to love our neighbour as our selves: This BIRTH-RIGHT OF FREE TRADE being as well our neighbours right as our own, therefore we petitioned as well for our neighbours, as for our selves.

Reas. 2. The second reason is drawn from the intent of the Protestation, which we solemnly took in the presence of Almighty God, To maintain the right and priviledge of the people with our lives and estates; this Free trade being all mens right and priviledge as well as our own, upon that ground we were moved to petition as well for their right of Free Trade, as for our own.

Obj. 1. But these Companies have been of long standing.

Ans. So have the Prelats, and so much the more wrong done to the Common-wealth, and therefore so much the greater need to be put down. For although robbing and taking of purses upon the high way, be of ancient standing, yet it doth not thereupon follow that such a practice is ever the lawfuller.

Ob. 2. But Magna Charta doth continue Bishops. (But I say, Magna Charta doth not establish Bishops, but onely the liberties and rights of the Church of England: and what those are, the Scripture doth best tell us. And although Bishops be taken away, yet the liberties of the Church established by Magna Charta, to this very day remain,) And admits transportation of wooll.

Ans. It is one thing to pull down Bishops, and make an Act against transporting of wool, being the desire and for the good of all; but it is another thing to take away the peoples Birth-right, FREE TRADE, without their consent, and to their prejudice, yea and against many petitions of many thousands in many Parliaments preferred for the rescuing of that right, and reparations for the countries wrongs.

Obj. 3, But Free trade will be destructive to the Common-wealth.

Ans. It will bee no more destructive to Eastland, Muscovia, Turkie, the Low-Countries, and other places, then it is for France, Spain, Ireland, Portugal, and Scotland, which is none at all.

Obj. 4. But Cloath is of another and better nature then Wine, &c. which are forraigne commodities.

Ans. The greater is the wrong, it being the grand in-land commodity, so that all other Patents and Monopolies may bee better renewed, then this continued.

Obj. 5. But Clothiers, and the like men, have not knowledge to manage this Free Trade.

Ans. If it were so (as it is not) yet the same is occasioned by these theeves and robbers, that cunningly and secretly by a faire but unjust and deceitfull pretence, steale the Common-wealths right, so as they are deprived of that opportunity to educate their children and servants, which may enable them to manage that priviledge of Free Trade.

Obj. 6. But they are against government, and would walk disorderly.

Ans. No, we would have both government and order in a solid and just way, but we are against hellish oaths, unlawful fines, sinfull orders, false imprisonment, law and right-sellers, all which are practised by these Trade-ingrossers, as will appeare by good testimony.

Obj. 7. But no man hath followed the petition.

Ans. Is it not the duty of every Trustee in the House of Commons to prosecute the Common-wealths right, and peoples priviledge? But if that be the hinderance, it is the humble desire of the Remonstrant, that Mr. Rigby, and Mr. Martin may be appointed to draw up a full Ordinance without delay, that hee or they, whosoever they be, under what pretence or fraud soever, may bee accursed that removes his neighbours land-mark (his Birth-right, or Free trade) and that the Commons house may approve themselves faithfull, and worthy the Common-wealths trust, and according to the solemne protestation, to bring to exemplary and condigne punishment, those who have been theeves and robbers in this kind; and according to an order made this present Parliament, it is earnestly desired, that the House may be purged of all such as are Patentees, Monopolizers, Trade-ingrossers, Sellers of peoples right, and destroyers of the Free Trade.

And also out of all other places of publick trust under the Parliament, whether in the Custome-house, Commission of Excise, Committees in City or Countrey, Soldiery, or other government, as Sheriffs, Treasurers, Majors, Aldermen, and the like, who are not worthy to be continued in any Common-wealths trust; & so much the more, by how much the longer they have practised such deceitfull robbery, and to let all such as have been wronged by these kind of men, have freedom with respect and countenance, to prosecute against these Caterpillers, for due reparations, according to the wrongs done by them and their Predecessors.

And if the Parliament would have the free people to fight for them, as they have willingly done, by venturing their lives and estates freely, to maintain their power and priviledge against the common enemy; then let that power bee improved and laid out again for the right and priviledge of the said people, to rescue and recover their Birth-right (Free Trade) out of the hands of those greedy and subtile spoylers, yea and grinders of the faces of the poore.

If any further objection be made against Free trade; then it is earnestly desired that the House of Commons would answer it themselves, as parties in behalfe of the free people, who have called them to that trust for that end; or otherwise let the mind & sense of the common people in every County and Corporation (all England over) be produced, and let it go upon that, in which way the Remonstrant is perswaded, that a hundred to one will bee for Free Trade.

So hoping this high and Honorable Court will have due respect to the premises, in all dutifull acknowledgement; the Remonstrant shall desire to prove himselfe the Common-wealths servant,

March 20. 1645.

William Sykes.

FINIS.

Endnotes

 [* ] Note well.