Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A60214
|
Discourses concerning government by Algernon Sidney ... ; published from an original manuscript of the author.
|
Sidney, Algernon, 1622-1683.
|
1698
(1698)
|
Wing S3761; ESTC R11837
|
539,730
|
470
|
Right we do not know who is near to him All Mankind must inherit the Right to which every one hath an equal title and that which is Dominion if in one when 't is equally divided among all men is that universal Liberty which I assert Wherefore I leave it to the choice of such as have inherited our Author's opinions to produce this Jew or Turk that ought to be Lord of the whole Earth or to prove a better title in some other person and to perswade all the Princes and Nations of the World to submit If this be not done it must be confessed this Paternal Right is a meer whimsical Fiction and that no man by birth hath a Right above another or can have any unless by the concession of those who are concerned If this right to an universal Empire be divisible Noah did actually divide it among his three Sons Seventy and two absolute Monarchs did at once arise out of the Multitude that had assembled at Babel Noah nor his Sons nor any of the holy Seed nor probably any elder than Nimrod having bin there many other Monarchs must necessarily have arisen from them Abraham as our Author says was a King Lot must have bin so also for they were equals his Sons Ammon and Moab had no dependance upon the descendents of Abraham Ismael and Esau set up for themselves and great Nations came of them Abraham's Sons by Keturah did so also that is to say every one as soon as he came to be of age to provide for himself did so without retaining any dependence upon the Stock from whence he came Those of that Stock or the head of it pretended to no Right over those who went from them Nay nearness in Blood was so little regarded that tho Lot was Abraham's Brother's Son Eliezer his Servant had bin his Heir if he had died childless The like continued amongst Jacob's Sons no Jurisdiction was given to one above the rest an equal division of Land was made amongst them Their Judges and Magistrates were of several Tribes and Families without any other preference of one before another than what did arise from the advantages God had given to any particular person This I take to be a proof of the utmost extent and certainty that the equality amongst Mankind was then perfect He therefore that will deny it to be so now ought to prove that neither the Prophets Patriarchs or any other men did ever understand or regard the Law delivered by God and Nature to Mankind or that having bin common and free at the first and so continued for many hundreds of years after the Flood it was afterwards abolished and a new one introduced He that asserts this must prove it but till it does appear to us when where how and by whom this was done we may safely believe there is no such thing and that no man is or can be a Lord amongst us till we make him so and that by nature we are all Brethren Our Author by endeavouring farther to illustrate the Patriarchical Power destroys it and cannot deny to any man the Right which he acknowledges to have bin in Ismael and Esau. But if every man hath a Right of setting up for himself with his Family or before he has any he cannot but have a right of joining with others if he pleases As his joining or not joining with others and the choice of those others depends upon his own will he cannot but have a right of judging upon what conditions 't is good for him to enter into such a Society as must necessarily hinder him from exercising the right which he has originally in himself But as it cannot be imagined that men should generally put such Fetters upon themselves unless it were in expectation of a greater good that was thereby to accrue to them no more can be required to prove that they do voluntarily enter into these Societies institute them for their own good and prescribe such rules and forms to them as best please themselves without giving account to any But if every man be free till he enter into such a Society as he chuseth for his own good and those Societies may regulate themselves as they think fit no more can be required to prove the natural equality in which all men are born and continue till they resign it as into a common stock in such measure as they think fit for the constituting of Societies for their own good which I assert and our Author denies SECT XIII There was no shadow of a paternal Kingdom amongst the Hebrews nor precept for it OUr Author is so modest to confess that Jacob's Kingdom consisting of seventy two persons was swallowed up by the power of the greater Monarch Pharaoh But if this was an Act of Tyranny 't is strange that the sacred and eternal Right grounded upon the immutable Laws of God and Nature should not be restored to God's chosen People when he delivered them from that Tyranny Why was not Jacob's Monarchy conferred upon his right Heir How came the People to neglect a point of such importance Or if they did forget it why did not Moses put them in mind of it Why did not Jacob declare to whom it did belong Or if he is understood to have declared it in saying the Scepter should not depart from Judah why was it not delivered into his hands or into his Heirs If he was hard to be found in a people of one kindred but four degrees removed from Jacob their head who were exact in observing Genealogies how can we hope to find him after so many thousand years when we do not so much as know from whom we are derived Or rather how comes that Right which is eternal and universal to have bin nipp'd in the bud and so abolished before it could take any effect in the World as never to have bin heard of amongst the Gentiles nor the People of God either before or after the Captivity from the death of Jacob to this day This I assert and I give up the Cause if I do not prove it To this end I begin with Moses and Aaron the first Rulers of the People who were neither of the eldest Tribe according to birth nor the disposition of Jacob if he did or could give it to any nor were they of the eldest line of their own Tribe and even between them the Superiority was given to Moses who was the younger as 't is said I have made thee a God to Pharaoh and Aaron thy Brother shall be thy Prophet If Moses was a King as our Author says but I deny and shall hereafter prove the matter is worse He must have bin an Usurper of a most unjust Dominion over his Brethren and this Patriarchical power which by the Law of God was to be perpetually fixed in his Descendents perished with him and his Sons continued in an obscure rank amongst the Levites Joshua of the Tribe of Ephraim succeeded him
the Commonwealth be named wherever the Multitude or so much as the major part of it consented either by Voice or Procuration to the Election of a Prince not observing that if an Answer could not be given he did overthrow the Rights of all the Princes that are or ever have bin in the world for if the Liberty of one man cannot be limited or diminished by one or any number of men and none can give away the Right of another 't is plain that the Ambition of one man or of many a faction of Citizens or the mutiny of an Army cannot give a Right to any over the Liberties of a whole Nation Those who are so set up have their root in Violence or Fraud and are rather to be accounted Robbers and Pirats than Magistrates Leo Africanus observing in his History that since the extinction of Mahomet's Race to whom his Countrymen thought God had given the Empire of the World their Princes did not come in by the consent of those Nations which they governed says that they are esteemed Thieves and that on this account the most honourable Men among the Arabians and Moors scorn to eat drink or make Alliances with them and if the case were as general as that Author makes it no better Rule could be any where followed by honourable and worthy Men. But a good Cause must not be lost by the fault of an ill Advocate the Rights of Kings must not perish because Filmer knows not how to defend or dos maliciously betray them I have already proved that David and divers of the Judges were chosen by all Israel Jeroboam by ten Tribes all the Kings of Rome except Tarquin the Proud by the whole City I may add many Examples of the Saxons in our own Country Ina and Offa were made Kings omnium consensu These All are expressed plainly by the words Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Senatoribus Ducibus Populo terrae Egbert and Ethelward came to the Crown by the same Authority Omnium consensu Rex creatur Ethelwolf the Monk Necessitate cogente factus est Rex consensus publicus in regem dari petiit Ethelstan tho a Bastard Electus est magno consensu Optimatum a Populo consalutatus In the like manner Edwin's Government being disliked they chose Edgar Vnanimi omnium conspiratione Edwino dejecto eligerunt Deo dictante Edgarum in Regem annuente Populo And in another place Edgarus ab omni Anglorum Populo electus est Ironside being deâ—d Canutus was received by the general consent of all Juraverunt illi quod eum regem sibi eligere vellent foedus etiam cum principibus omni populo ipse illi cum ipso percusserunt Whereupon Omnium consensu super totam Angliam Canutus coronatur Hardicanutus gaudenter ab omnibus suscipitur electus est The same Author says that Edward the Confessor Electus est in regem ab omni populo And another Omnium Electione in Edwardum concordatur Tho the name of Conqueror be odiously given to William the Norman he had the same Title to the Crown with his Predecessors In magna exultatione a Clero Populo susceptus ab omnibus Rex acclamatus I cannot recite all the Examples of this kind that the History of almost all Nations furnishes unless I should make a Volume in bulk not inferior to the Book of Martyrs But those which I have mentioned out of the Sacred Roman and English History being more than sufficient to answer our Author's Challenge I take liberty to add that tho there could not be one Example produced of a Prince or any other Magistrate chosen by the general consent of the People or by the major part of them it could be of no advantage to the Cause he has undertaken to maintain For when a People hath either indefinitely or under certain Conditions and Limitations resigned their Power into the hands of a certain number of men or agreed upon Rules according to which persons should from time to time be deputed for the management of their Affairs the Acts of those persons if their Power be without restrictions are of the same value as the Acts of the whole Nation and the assent of every individual man is comprehended in them If the Power be limited whatsoever is done according to that limitation has the same Authority If it do therefore appear as is testified by the Laws and Histories of all our Northern Nations that the power of every People is either wholly or to such a degree as is necessary for creating Kings granted to their several Gemotes Diets Cortez Assemblies of Estates Parliaments and the like all the Kings that they have any where or at any time chosen do reign by the same authority and have the same right as if every individual man of those Nations had assented to their Election But that these Gemotes Diets and other Assemblies of State have every where had such Powers and executed them by rejecting or setting up Kings and that the Kings now in being among us have received their beginning from such Acts has bin fully proved and is so plain in it self that none but those who are grosly stupid or impudent can deny it which is enough to shew that all Kings are not set up by violence deceit faction of a sew powerful men or the mutinies of Armies but from the consent of such multitudes as joining together frame Civil Societies and either in their own persons at general Assemblies or by their Delegates confer a just and legal Power upon them which our Author rejecting he dos as far as in him lies prove them all to be Usurpers and Tyrants SECT VI. They who have a right of chusing a King have the right of making a King THO the Right of Magistrates do essentially depend upon the consent of those they govern it is hardly worth our pains to examin Whether the silent acceptation of a Governor by part of the People be an argument of their concurring in the election of him or by the same reason the tacit consent of the whole Commonwealth may be maintained for when the question is concerning Right fraudulent surmises are of no value much less will it from thence follow that a Prince commanding by Succession Conquest or Usurpation may be said to be elected by the People for evident marks of dissent are often given Some declare their hatred other murmur more privately many oppose the Governour or Government and succeed according to the measure of their Strength Virtue or Furtune Many would resist but cannot and it were ridiculous to say that the Inhabitants of Greece the Kingdom of Naples or Dutchy of Tuscany do tacitly assent to the Government of the Great Turk King of Spain or Duke of Florence when nothing is more certain than that those miserable Nations abhor the Tyrannies they are under and if they were not mastered by a Power that