but of our own Soveraign's Father and that only because he could not Dissolve them but had in effect signed his Destiny with their Bill of Sitting during the Pleasure of the two Houses Base Hypocrites 't is not a Parliaments Sitting you contend for but the Sitting of such a Parliament that good honest Parliament the late long and healing one which their virulent Villains Libelled for Popish Pensionary perhaps because it would not take the Peoples pay long enough might that have been discontinued or Prorogued wen ever heard then of the Statutes of Edwards and the Triennial Acts but their Pens were employed then to prove even that Dissolution that discontents them now so much 'T is not above Eight years since their * Vide Considerations upon the Question London 1677. The dissolver The Letter of my Lord Shaftsbury Pamphlets would demonstrate a Parliament dissolved for being but for Fiveteen Months Prorogued and were we but assured of having such another the Press had never been pestered for the calling one with their impertinnent prints nor any Petitions prefer'd for their Frequency Would you perswade the World your purses are so full so free too that you long for a Subsidy to fill up the Kings Dissembling Souls the Parliament they clamour for can proceed from nothing else but a presumption of one to be their Patrons to patronize all their Irregularities and Refractoryness to the State to countenance all those gross abuses they put upon the Government they told us this to our faces and Menaced men to make them fear them Is this the way to have them Convened to make them formidable For Gods sake can you credit that honorable Assembly with making them the pretended Abettors of all your Scandalous Actions The only felicity we have in such a Senate 's sitting is That the King must summon them to sit they are Rebels by a ‖ 35. Ed. 3. Law if they convene without they must meet and Associate and the Kings happiness consists in his being able to Dissolve and Discontinue And this furious and indefatigable Scribler might have omitted the mentioning of those †4. Ed. 3. c. 14. Statutes they have beaten so bare been baffled in so much and may now blush to bring upon the Stage but he shall have his answer here to this too That nothing of Mr. Hunt's like his managed Mungrel * Vid. Courantier 4. Volum Numb 30. Julian may be call'd Vnanswerable For the First it is the 4th of this ‖ 4. Ed. 3. c. 3. 14. Edward And I confess in as few words That a Parliament be holden once every year and more often if NEED BE. It is all the Letter of the Law and every Line of it But they might as well tell us too that before the Conquest and for some time after Parliaments were held three times in one year They had then their Easter Parliaments their Whit-sunday Parliaments their Christmas Parliaments but they know then that they were but so many Conventions of that Nobility and Clergy their King should please to call And which they did Arbitrary at their Will more frequently or less as they thought convenient and the †Mirror C. 1. Lib. 3. Books tell us they many times were held but twice a year now if these Gentlemen will tell us so much of old Statute Laws why should not Custom which is Resolved by the very Books to be the * Le common Ley est common Usage Plowdens Com. 195. Common decide the case too for the King as well as the other which is their own must for the People and then we find Our Kings had the sole power of Convening Parliaments by a long prescription of whom where and as often as they pleased Are not all our Judicial Records Acts of Parliament Resolved to be but so many Declarations of the Common Law and that by all our Lawyers even concerning the Royal Government which they make the very Fundamental Law of the Land and tell us ‖ Dr. and Stud. 2. c. 2. lib. That by Common Law is understood such things as were Law before any Statute by general and particular Customs and Maxims of the Realm Now if Statute must be but Declaratory of these Customs of the Kingdom how can it be concluded but that such Acts as directly contradict any of them must be absolutely void for by the same Reason that they can with a Be it enacted void any part of it they may the whole With the same Reason that they can invade any part of the Prerogative of their Prince which the * 2d part Inst 496. tells us so in terminis By the Common Law it is the Kings Prerogative quod nullum Tempus occurret L. Coke Lit. p. 344. Book tells us is the principal part of the Common Law they may abolish the whole make Killing no Murder and except Persons from the Punishment of Treason Does not this Common Law it self void any Statutes that are made against the Prerogative of their King Was it not in this very ‖ Stanfor l. 2. 101. Edward the 3ds time that it was so Resolved even to the nulling three several Acts that put Pardons out of the Princes power The boldest of these Anti-monarchical Zealots cannot deny but that by the Common Customs of the Realm it always was Our Kings undoubted Prerogative to call and dissolve their Parliament when they pleased Chronicle confirms it * Speed 645. Inst 27. 2. Law Resolves it may practice for ever maintain it Now I cannot see why these Statutes that contradict the Customs of the Realm in determining their King to call Parliaments which the Common Law hath left at his Liberty should not be as much void as †2. Ed. 3. c. 2. of King's not pardoning Felons so Also 4. Ed. 3. c. 13. The Conffrmation of that other others that upon the like Reasons have been Resolved so And if the Common Law can avoid any particular Act of Parliament against the Prerogative of the Prince as we see it did more than one If Stanfords Authoty be Law then the Conclusion is unavoidable That for the same Reason it can any or all And in my poor apprehension that Act it self of the late Kings which reasonably repeals that of his * 16. Cap. 2. c. 1. that repeals 16. Car. 1. c. 1. Martyred Fathers that Act with which these reproachful fellows upbraided in their prints their deceased King is so far from countenanceing their clamorous Cause that it corroborates and confirms our own Case for it tells us the very Reason of repealing those Statutes To prevent intermission of Parliaments And what is that but what we say the Common Law would of it self void ‖ Vid. Preamble to 16. Car. 2. c. 1. an Act as they say in derogation of his Majestys just Rights and Prerogative inherent in the Imperial Crown of this Realm for the Calling and Assembling of Parliaments Nay they tell us
runs all in the sole Wil of the King Charter it self their Act of Liberty they so much Labour in that not the meanest Subject can be Try'd or Judg'd unless it be by his Peers Equals much less so mighty a Monarch that has none and a Fortiori then with lesser Reason by those that are his own Subjects so far from being his Peers or Equals that they are together his Inferiors which has made me think many times these preposterous Asserters of so much Nonsense these Seditious Defenders of those Liberties they never understood did apprehend by the word Pares in the Law not the common Acceptation of it in the Latin but only the abused Application of it of our own English only to our House of Lords And conclude the King might be Judg'd by those we commonly call PEERS because they sit in that Honorable House and at the same to be Judg'd according to Magna Charta that all Judgements be per pares But does not each Dunce and every Dolt understand that the very Letter of the Law looks after this only that every Person be tryed at the least by those that are of his own Condition and that in the Legal Acceptation of the Word every Commoner of the Lower House nay every one of their Electors is as much a Peer as the greatest Person of the House of Lords In short they must put some such silly Seditious Exposition upon the plainest Letter when they pretend to Judge their King or else from the very Law of their own Liberty they labor in allow that their King has no Judges In that Act against Appeals that was enacted in the time of Henry the 8th 24. H. 8. c. 12. the very Parliament upon whom the People and even these Republicans so much depend tells us even in the very Letter of that Law That it is Manifest from Authentick History and Chronicle That the Realm of England is an Empire That its Crown is an Imperial one That therefore their King is furnish'd by the goodness of Almighty God with an intire Power and Prerogative to render and yield Justice to all manner of Folk in all Causes and Contentions This by solemn Act is declared of their King this Excludes the People from Judging of themselves much more their Soveraigns This the Resolution of a popular Parliament they would make even the Supream and this by them resolved even in Opposition to that Popery these Panick Fools so much and so vainly fear Do not the Books the best Declarations of the Law let us understand that which they against the Resolutions of all the Law it self would so foolishly maintain that it was resolved in Edward the 4th's time That the King cannot be said to do any wrong and then surely can't be Judg'd by his very People for doing it when impossible to be done and was not this the Sense of †Vid. 1. Ed. 5. fol. 2. all the Judges and Serjeants of the time to whose Opinion it was submitted was it not upon the same Reason a Resolution of Si Le Roy moy disseisit pur ceo que Le Roy en le ley ne poit moy disseisir il né serrá appell disseisor mes jeo sue mis a petition à Roy. 4. Ed. 4. 25. 13. the Law in Edward the 4th's time that because the Soveraign could not be said to injure any Subject therefore the Law never looks upon him as a disseisor a disposesser of any Man 's Right and all the remedy it will allow you is only Plaint and Petition Does not my Lord Coke himself that in several places is none of the greatest Assertor of the Right of the Soveraign fairly tell us * Coke Comon West 1. 2. Inst p. 158. least it should be vainly fear'd they should reflect upon the King 's own Misgovernment all the fault should rest upon the Officers and Ministers of his Justice Does it not appear from the ‖ Stat. to pursue suggestious 37. E. 3. c. 18. 38. Ed. 3. c. 9. Statutes of Edward the third that notwithstanding the strict Provision of the Charter for the Tryal by Peers that the King was still look'd upon as a Judge with his Council and Officers to receive Plaints and decide Suggestions and tho that and the subsequent of the next year provide against false ones yet it confirms still the power of the King to hear and determine them whether false or true Have they not heretofore answered touching Freehold even before their King and Council and a Parliament Parl. Glocester 2. Ric. 2. only Petition'd their Soveraign with all Submission that the Subject might not be summon'd for the future by a Chancery Writ or Privy Seal to such an Appearance but this they 'll say was the result of the Soveraigns Usurpations upon the Laws of the Land of a King Richard the 2d That did deserve to be deposed Brief History of Succession p. 7. as well as the Articles of his Depositions to be read †Plato Rediviv p. 116. 234. a King that forfeited the executive Power of his Militia for prefering worthless People and was himself of little worth or as the most Licentious and Lewdest Libel of a longer date has it †a King that found Fuel for his Lust in all Lewd and uncivil Courses Now tho March Needham Merc. Polit n. 65. Sept 4. 1651. we have the Authority of the best of our Historians for the good Qualities of this Excellent tho but an unhappy Prince and who could never have fell so unfortunately had his Subjects served him more faithfully tho Mr. Hollinshed Hollinshed 3d. Vol. Chron. F. 508. N. 50. tells us never any Prince was more unthankfully used never Commons in greater wealth never Nobles more cherish'd or the Church less wrong'd and as Mr. How has it in Beauty Bounty How 's Annals p. 277. and Liberality he surpassed all his Predecessors and Baker the best among our Moderns says there were aparent in him a great many good Inclinations that he was only abused in his Youth but if he had been Guilty afterward in his riper Age of some proceedings these Republicans had reason to reproach I am sure he was Innocent of those foolish Innuendo's those false and frivolous Accusations for which they rejected him viz. for unworthiness and insufficiency Vid. Trussel in vit R. 2. when he never appear'd in all his Reign more worthy of the Government than at the very time they deposed him for being unworthy to Govern But whatever were the vices of that Prince with which our virulent Antimonarchists would blast and blemish his Memory yet we see from the President that is cited the Sense of his Subjects Parl. Glocest did not then savor so much of Sedition as insolently to demand it for their Privilege and Birth-right which without doubt they might have pretended to call so as much as any of those the Commons have since several times so
from this Authority they can have no proof and from Wise Men can be gathered nothing but such as were Noble or chief of the Realm for the meaner sort and that which we now call the Commonality were then far enough from having any great share of Learning or common Understanding and then besides these Wisest of the People were only such whom the King should think Wise and admit to his Council far from being sent by their Borroughs as elected Senators King Alfred had his Parliament and a great one was held by King Athelstan at Grately ' which only tells us there were Assembled some Bishops Noble-Men and the Wise-Men whom the King called which implies no more then those he had a mind should come But the Antiquity of a Parliament or that of an House of Commons is not so much the thing these Factious Roll and Record Mongers contend for 't is its Superiority Supremacy and there endeavours to make them antient is but in order to the making their Power Exorbitant and not to be controul'd by that of their King whom in the next place this Re-publican can scarce allow the power of calling them at his Pleasure and dissolving them when he pleases But so great is the Power of Truth and the Goodness of the Cause he Opposes that he is forc't to contradict himself to defend his Paradoxes For he tells us the King is obliged with an hear-say Law which his learned in the Faculty and Faction can't find out yet Page 111. to call Parliaments as often as need should be that is they think fit And also not to dissolve them till all their Petitions were answered that is till they are willing to be gone But then will I defie the Gentleman to shew me the difference between this their desired Parliament and a Perpetual sitting do not these industrious Endeavours for such a perpetuity of them plainly tell us 't is that 's the only thing they want and that they are taught experimentally that that alone run the three Kingdoms into absolute Rebellion and ruined the best of Kings and can as certainly compass the Destruction of the present But I 'll tell the lump of Contradiction first the words of our greatest Lawyer and then his own Cooke says none 4. Insti 27. 2. 1. Inst Sect. 164. can begin continue or dissolve a Parliament but by the Kings Authority Himself says that which is undoubtedly the Plato Red. page 105. Kings Right is to call and dissolve Parliaments 'T is impertinent to labour to contradict that which he here so plainly confutes himself the Statesman being so big with his Treasonable Notions so full of his Faction that his Memory fails him makes him forget his own Maxims and makes his subsequent Pages wrangle with the Concessions of those that went before His next Observation is a perfect Comment upon his Text that had in it implicit Treason before he tells us in Justification of the Barons Wars which all our Historians represent as a perfect Page 107. Rebellion That the Peers were fain to use their Power and can he tell me by what Law Subjects are impowred to Rebel He calls it arming of their Vassals for the defence of the Government That Bill by which they would have associated of late that I confess had it past into Act would have made Rebellion Statutable And they themselves must indeed have had the Sovereign power when they had gotten their Sovereign to suffer himself to be sworn out of his Supremacy they might well have armed their Vassals then when they had got his Majesties leave to commence Rebels and Traytors for the Protection of his Person and the Preservation of his Crown and Dignity But these humble Boons were no more than that Bill must have begged and these kind Concessions no more than was expected from the Grant of a King so Gracious a Petition that might well have been answered like that of Bathsheba's by bidding them ask the Kingdom also The Barons standing in open defiance Ibid. page 108. to the Laws tho they stood up too so much for them He calls the Peers keeping their Greatness and this is the Sovereign Power the Rebel would have them again set up for to be great in their Arms as well as Quality and demand with the Sword again the Prerogative of their Kings and the grant of the Regalia which in their preposterous Appellations was abused with the pretence of priviledge and right and which the force of the Field can soon make of the greatest Usurpation and wrong But in the very next Page 't is 109. expounded clearly what has may and must be done in such Conjunctions that is to your Arms. He tells us after they had obtained the framing of their Charters and I think they were as much as the most condescending Monarchs could grant or the most mutinous malecontents require Then arose another grievance unseen and unprovided for This was the Intermission of Parliaments which could not be called but by the Prince and he not doing it they ceast for some years to be Assembled if this had not been speedily remedied The provoking Rebel for certainly he is as much so that Animates a Rebellion as he that is actually engaged in it and is by Law so declared tells us the Barons must have put on their Armour again and 25. Ed. 3. Plat. pag. 109. the brisk Assertors of their Rights not have acquiesc'd in this Omission that ruined the Foundations of the Government After all the kind Concessions of the Prince the putting him upon that which was the taking away of the very remains of Royalty puts me in mind of one of our late Expressions of a popular Representative that could declare in open Assembly as attested by some of the very Members of it that tho this their Bill of Exclusion were past which was more we see than the most mildest Monarch could grant or even our House of Peers sure the better part of our Nation could in Modesty require yet still there was more work to be done and a Reformation to be made in the Church as well as the State The Patriot was prepared to lanch out in such kind of Extravagancies and told the truth of the Plot before his time had not calmer Heads interposed and cool'd his hot one into common Sense Several of the Speeches spoken in Parliament for which its Publisher deserves to be Pillor'd if not Authentick and True and brought before them on his Knees at least for his Presumption if they are it being here as Criminal to Print Truths at all times without an Imprimatur as 't is to tell it without leave even in several of those Speeches Publisht in that Paper I reflected on in the beginning where the Pedantick Author has exposed me in the Tail of his History that lookt like the Narrative of a Rump History of the Association Printed by Janeway there are as bold Expressions of
confirmed Henry the 7th had his Negative Voice the thing those Seditious discontented Grumblers so much repine at maintained asserted for his undoubted Prerogative It is at present by the Law of ‖ 12. H. 7. 20. 7. H. 7. 14. his Time no Statute if the King assent not A Prince beloved and favoured only because he was their King who tho he had as many subsidies granted more than any before him His Subjects you see never thought it a Grievance then to contribute to their Soveraign's being Great but acknowledged his Supremacy even under their greatest pressure His Extortion upon penal Statutes * Vid. 4. Inst Baker page 248. Historians call and the Law the most unjustest way for raising of Money that was ever used yet still had he the Hearts of his People as well as their Purses They thought Rebellion then could not be Justifyed with clamor of Oppression as since by Ship-money and Lone tho levyed by a King whom themselves had Opprest The simplicity of those times made them suffer like good Subjects and better Christians when the refined Politicks of such Authors and a profligate age can tell them now to be Wise is to Rebel I need not tell him who managed Affairs in Henry the †H. 8. Eighth's Time when Parliaments seemed to be frightned into Compliance with a Frown and Bills preferr'd more for the pleasure of the Prince than the profit of the People Their Memberships then so far from medling with the measures of the State that they seemed to take them for their sole Measures so far was then an Order of the House from controuling that of the Board And I can't see that the Peoples * 1 Car 3. Petition of Right has since beg'd away too the King's Prerogative yet it was affirmed for ‖ 25. H. 8. C. 21. Law in this King's Time that he had full power in all Causes to do Justice to all Men. If the Parliament or their Council shall †Plato manage Affairs let them tell me what will become of this Power and Law His Son Edward succeeded him and tho a Minor a Prince whose Youth might have given the People an opportunity for an Encroachment upon his Power and the Subject commonly will take advantage of the Supremacy and that sometimes too much when the Soveraign knows but little what it is to be a King I am sure they were so Seditiously Wise in that Infancy of Henry the Third and yet he had Protectors too as well as this But notwithstanding such an Opportunity for the robbing the Rights of the Crown you shall see then they took the first occasion for the asserting them In the very First year of his Reign it was resolved that all Authoritie and Jurisdiction Spiritual and Temporal is derived from the King but this Republican has found out another Resolution of resolving it into the power of the Parliament And in this very ‖ 5 Ed. 6. c. 11. Reign too it was provided as the common Policy and Duty of all Loving Subjects to restrain the Publishing all manner of Shameful Slanders against their King c. upon whom dependeth the whole Unity and Universal weal of the Realm what Sentence then would the Parliaments of those times have past upon Appeals to the City vox patriae's and a Plato Redivivus upon a Libel that would prove the †Plat. pag. 117. Kings Executive power of War forfeitable and that the * pag. 237. Prerogative which is in the Crown hinders the Execution of the Laws tho I am sure those very Laws are the best Asserters of the Prerogative there next resolve would have been to have ordered such an Author to the Flames by the Hands of the Hangman instead of that Honorable Vote the thanks of the House In Queen Mary's Time too the Law left all to her Majesty tells her all * 1 Mar. c. 2. Jurisdiction does and of Right ought to belong to her In Queen Elizabeth's ‖ 1 El. c. 1. Time what was Law before they were obliged even to Swear to be so Every Member of the House before qualified to sit in it forc'd to acknowledg his Soveraign SVPREAM in all Causes over all Persons And were their Memberships to be modelled according to the Common-wealth of this Plato their Oath must be repealed or they perjur'd Their very Constitution would be Inconfistant with his Supremacy they must manage and Command at the same time they Swear to submit and obey Was there ever a more full acknowledgment of Power and Prerogative than was made to King †Jac. c. 1. James upon his first coming to the Crown And tho I confess they took upon them to manage Affairs in his Son and Successors time yet this was not until they had openly bid him defyance to his Face and actually declared War against His Person then they might well set up their Votes for Law when they had violated the Fundamental ones of the Land yet themselves even in that Licentious and tumultuous time could own ‖ K. Charles his Collect. Ordinanc 1. part fol. 728. that such Bills as His Majesty was bound even in Conscience and Justice to pass were no Laws without his Assent What then did they think of those Ordinances of Blood and Rebellion with which themselves past such Bills afterward so unconscionable so unjust Here it was I confess these Commons of this pernicious Projector took upon them the management of the State their Councils their Committees set up for regulating the Kings Then their †Vid. wil. Prynns Parliam right to elect privy Councellors Pillor'd Advocate that lost his ears as this with his Treasonable Positions should his Head Publisht the very same Proposal in his pestering Prints the very Vomit of the Press to which the dangerous Dog did in the Literal Sense return to lick it up still discharing again the same choler he had brought up before in a Nauseous Crambe A Wretch that seemed to Write for the Haberdashers and Trunk-makers instead of the Company of Stationers that Elaborate Lining the Copious Library for Hat-cases and Close-stools that Will with a whisp whose fuming Brains were at last illuminated for the leading Men into Boggs and Ditches Rebellion and Sedition The Confusion of others only for the confounding of himself ‖ Vid. his Memento to Juncto for the for a King for the †2d his Parliaments Soveraigns Power For the Parliament for the * 3d. his Lords Bishops none of the Lords Bishops or the Buckle of the Canonical Girdle turned behind 〈…〉 every 〈…〉 for nothing but that ONE thing Scribble Compare the power of his Parliaments and his Vnparliamentary Juncto the meer Lumps of distorted Law or Legal Contradiction with the 25th of Edward He first deposes his King and even there then finds his Deposition Treason Their Divine Baxter never baffled himself more with the Bible and the Gospel than this Elaborate Legislator with
the Word Country that was I believe as well as he antecedent to the King but must it be inferred because the Land was once without Kings therefore now no Kings must govern the Land For the Conclusion is as absurd to say That therefore the People have the Legislative and their Prince no Negative they do not consider the result of such rash Inferences which return upon themselves more stronger in the rebound and that even upon their tenderest places which they can hardly suffer to be touched Kings and Lords did a long time meet in Parliament before Commons in that Convention were so much as thought of and therefore must none now be convened The Papists proudly tell us their Religion was long before Luther and must we not now profess our Protestant Religion Another of the same Nature and as much Nonsense is * Ibid. this They infer from the possibility of the King 's dying without Heir and the Government returning to the People who then would be the Sole Legislators That therefore they must have much now of the present Legislative and be at least Co-ordinate that have a possibility of being Supream The Supposition sounds somewhat like the Song of the Children When all the Land is Paper c. Tho it spoils another good Proverb That no Man dyes without an Heir but the silly Souls do not consider that by the same Solecism and Supposititious Reason not a Subject has a Right to a Foot of His Land For the Law says All that is in England belongs to the King as ‖ 12. H. 7. 20. Coke 1. Inst p. 1. Lord which if the owners dye without Heirs must escheat to the Crown and sure 't is as possible for any Subject to dye without Heirs as his Soveraign when the †25. Ed. 3. Treason to destroy the Heir of the Crown Law has taken special Care for them and then 't is but turning their possibility of a Right into an actual one and they will be the most obliging Subjects to the Crown that bring such Arguments against it Another of * Pryn his Treatise ibid. Pryn's pretty Paradoxes is the very same with ‖ Postscript pag. 51. Hunt's impudent Assertion I may with Modesty call it so since himself says he dares to be so bold to assert it It is that our Kings anciently always consented to Bills offered for the publick good and the Postscript that never any Bill was lost or wanted the Royal Assent promoted by the GENERAL DESIRES of the People That Bills have been rejected they 'll find upon Record and in the Journals of almost every Session and whatever is presented in Parliament must be supposed the Desires of the People who Sit themselves there in Representative but the mistaken Gentleman meant it of the Bill of Exclusion to be the Peoples General Desire but that at last he finds a Lye too and that the Generality have for the most part protested against it in Addresses declaring more the Sense of a People than a prevailing Party in an House of Commons when the best part of the Nation too the Lords did not concur But did not in * Vid. Camb. vit Eliz. 106. Edocta fuit quantum emineat a successore designato periculum Queen Elizabeth's Time and that even so lately the Parliament and even every Individual in the Nation desire her to declare her Successor I am sure with greater Sollicitation and a more general Unanimity than they could be said to desire that Exclusion of the present King's did not the two Houses offer her four subsidy Bills upon that very Consideration and she as resolutely reject both And could the refusing to shew even a Kindness to her next Successor upon the importunity of all her People with Money in their Hands be less resented And shall the King for declaring only against a Bill that was never tendered him for declining to concur in this deepest Injury to his own BROTHER and Heir and to pleasure those only that denyed to part with a Penny be reproached and condemned so much more Did not the Parliament tender to King James three several subsidies to break of the Match with Spain and the Treaty of the Palatinate and he refuse tho tempted with what is seldom the Subjects Bait Money How many Bills of Rebellion did the Mutinous Members and that in the Name of all the People prefer in their Propositions to our Martyred Soveraign to which the poor Prince prefer'd the most Ignominious Death rather than condescend with his Veult or Avisera * Hunt's Phraseology pag. 94. Base Caitiff forgive but your own Billings-Gate should these neither have wanted the Royal Assent because offered in the name of all the People of England and as the general Desire of the Subject if that Suggestion must have extorted his Assent then mighty Miscreant he must have past an Act for his own Tryal Sign'd a Warrant for his Murder for in that name he was Arraign'd †Vide Bradsh K. Tryal in that name he was Sentenc'd and in that he dyed Poor prejudic'd Soul whose discontent and Transport makes his own Maxims undermine the very Cause he would defend Is then this general desire of the People such an absolute infallible Determination of Matters of Religion and Descent of the Crown the very only points he labours for that if their Desires be but promoted put up in a Parliamentary way by Bill or Petition it must presently oblige the Royal Assent Be it so base Creatures your own Arguments as basely betray your own Religion your own Arguments well help truly to subvert that which you seek to Establish with such a furious but false Zeal for ought I know the Protestant Religion had been so setled in its Infancy in its first efforts of Reformation in the Reign of him that was the first Defender of our Faith that it could never have been so often interrupted with a succeeding Persecution had but Henry the Eighth refused the Bill of the * 31 H. 8. Six Articles prest upon him by both Houses this was Judged a just and necessary Bill from Hunt's General desire of the People but had it not been better had it not saved the Blood perhaps of all the mighty Book of Martyrs had the sturdy Prince rejected this as he did many other general Desires It was this Royal Assent alone which would to God it had been wanting and this Sycophant would have wish'd so too did he really love the Reliligion he so falsely labors for It was the Le Roy vult the result of the Peoples importunity that then establish'd that Religion by a Law which had it been but then neglected that which our Zealots make such fearful clamor at standing upon its last Legs had quite languish'd dropt into the Grave and been buryed in the Ruins and Rubbish of its own Religious Houses they demolish'd For in the latter end of his Reign so enraged did he seem
People that is to Rebel most Religiously Tell me Mighty Murmerer why must this Bugbear of Arbitrary this Monster of Absoluteness and * Posts p. 88. Bloody War be the Consequences of this Doctrine of Peace Is your King bound to turn Cruel only because he Rules by a Right from the very God of Mercy and a King too de facto not long since almost merciful to a Crime If you talk only in Theory of what another may be then perhaps your Fears are as Panick as the Objection is nothing to the purpose For Usurpers commonly of the People's Choice as appears even in our ‖ H. 4. R. 3. own History have always been the greatest Tyrants too who were so far from having the Jus Divinum that they had no Right at all And tho * Vid. Paper at his Execution Sidney suggests this Doctrine would attribute to any sort of Usurper the same Right I shall consider him in his proper place and this may suffice for Mr. Hunt whose larger Comment upon this Text I shall enlarge upon too when I come to that Gentleman's Papers with whom they so much agree and 't is pity but his Fate should do so too It may suffice I have here attempted his Bulwark and upon which they would build their Babel tho in the Burlesque of the best of Books as if neither the Bible had its Jus Divinum and will close with him since he is so pleased with St. Peter with a * Verse 15. Neighbouring Text not so much turned and misapplyed Mr. Hunt has done his worst and I hope we with well doing may put to silence the Ignorance of such Foolish Men. The third Doctrinal Case of this Divine Lawyer or what is drawn from the other two is the Parliament's Power upon the Succession and that he has proved he presumes beyond Answer and Reply when the two Preliminary points The Parliaments Legislative and The Peoples Divinity by his mighty Performances are made unquestionable But when he has begged the other two he may expect to have this third for asking and the first Presumption that must so proposterously warrant even that most Vnwarrantable Proceedings is the Gorgon of the Party that for this forty year has frightned the Nation The fear of Popery And like that Monstrous Head of Medusa been represented gastly full of Venom and Viper only not to charm us into Stones and Stupidity but the setting all in Combustion and a Flame Therefore he tells us if this can be but kept out which the Lord knows has been I don't know how long coming in We ought Page 50. to admit of any Law for the purpose And have we not Laws sufficient in force and that for the keeping out all the powers of the Pope tho His Pilgrims landed here with a Legion Have we not Oaths Tests two several Acts of Parliaments against Priest proselytes and Recusants Have we not the best Bulwark the Bishops and the greatest assurance the word of a King But in short the danger was then a Successor and nothing could serve less than a new Law And what was that why for Excluding an Heir to a Crown for Fifteen Hundred years Hereditary That Parliaments have presumed to alter the discent of the Crown is as true as that the same Convention of States have Rebel'd against the Crown it self And scarce one Instant of the Presidents he has giv'n us but serve to prove my purpose as well as his own that they either actually Rebel'd when they medled with the Succession or else that it was for settling it on the Right Heirs after such a Rebellion It was * Postscript p. 52. all the following Casesmost absurdly apply'd and all make against his own Cause Richard the Second 's that was a Parliament indeed that did more than meddle with the Succession when they actually deposed their Sovereign That of ‖ 7. H. 4. c. 2. Hen. 4th entails declar'd void viz. upon the Claim of Richard Duke of York Henry the Fourth so far from a Parliament that they had no King And that was told them to their faces by the Loyal Prelate of †Vid. B. Carlisles Speech H. 4. in Baker and Trussel H. 4ths Deposers Traytors within 25 Coke Treason Carlisle Henry the Sixth the Successor of one that had no Right and to whose Heir then they could never do any wrong Edward the * Vid. 1. Ed. 4. Rot. par 9. 10 11 12. Fourth was for securing the Descent in the Right Line and declaring all that of the Lancasters Rebels and that in spight of all those Entails this Lawyer lies his mighty stress upon and which even in his Fathers claim tho he never lived to enjoy the benefit of his Right The ‖ Vid. Rot. par 39. H. 6. n. 11. Parliament of the Usurper himself did with blushes and shame acknowledge That his Title could not be defeated that those Entails were only made for want of a better Title and very fairly made their Vsurper a enant for Life and that to an Excluded Duke of York and further did they force their Loyalty when his Son their Lawful Soveraign came to the Crown they tell him in the first of his Reign as appears in the * 1. Ed. 4. Rot. ut supra Roll That this Henry the Fourth upon whom Mr. Hunt triumphs that an Entail was made was an Vsurper Traytor and Murderer of his Soveraign And for his next Instance of Richard Rich. the 3d and deposers of Ed. 5. Traitors by Law within Stat. 25. Ed 3d Inst c. 1. Treason the Third would any one besides a Butcher and as Barbarous a Beast as the Precedent he brings tell us of an Entail they made upon his Heirs which was only a Settlement of Blood so much and Treason upon them and their posterity Bless me that men of Sense should be so inconsiderately besotted so Foolishly wicked sure Mr. Hunt knows that that Bloody Senate could never have boggled to settle a Crown upon the posterity of a Tyrant that they themselves had advanced to the Throne in the Blood of his Nephews They might well settle the Crown on Henry the Seventh that came to it by three several pleas Blood Arms and the Law and is the Settling it upon a Lawful Soveraign a President for Excluding another against All Law and those Entailments were but so many Recognitions Officious affirmatory Kindnesses to the Crown whereas their Exclusion must have been an Invading it His Acts of Henry the Eighth were such as all the World blusht at and any English-man may be ashamed to own Inconsistent contradictory Fruitless and illusory that made Protestants desert us that designed us for their Leaders in a League the shame of Europe and the Opprobrium of our Nation Did not his 25th on default of Male Entail the Crown on the Lady Elizabeth and made Mary Spurious Did not his 28th make the same Lady the Protestant Princess Illegitimate
that must depend upon the Authority of that Court from whence such Officer receives his Writ Warrant or Commission 't is * Coke R. 12. pt p. 49. Vid. also the same Case 4. Inst Cap. 74. p. 333. But as quick as Mr. Johnson jumbles up the the business the Judâ—es defer'd their Judgment till the next Assize and then perhaps the emulation there is and always was between the two Courts made their Lordships at â—ast a little Partial Brownlows 2d pt p. 15. Humptons Case 42. Eliz. adjudg'd in the Case that they might have cited to Appearance and upon Contumacy to have proceeded to Excommunication and then have arrested upon their Writ of Capias but that they could not Arrest him outright upon a Surmise That a Man may resist an Authority that is not Lawful any man will allow for it is the same as if he resisted none at all however if Murder be the Consequence of such a Resistance all his Expositors upon the sixth Commandment will hardly help him to distinguish it into Man-slaughter And tho my Lord * Vid. Pleas of the Crown Hales Hales whose Memory will still be pious for his equal destributions of Justice was a great Latitudinarian in allowing too much scope for premeditated Malice yet the Decalogue will make that Murder for which the Law will allow him the Benefit of his Clergy and did in Harry the Eight's time without distinction to all sort of shedding of Blood and then the Book that he talks of was dedicated to Cromwel would have been Authoriz'd by the Law which in some sort it self then made all Killing no Murder neither in an equitable sense was this Homicide excused from being a Murderer because he resisted unto blood before the jurisdiction of the * Besides 't is observable the Judges at that time had a particular pique to the power of that Court which they thought invaded theirs and might be very ready to give Judgment against them in Criminal Matters as well as Plague y'm with their Prohibitions in Civil and as they were then great Foes so my Lord Coke in his discourse upon the Court is but little their Friend Court was Resolved and to him in a Moral sense 't was as much Guilt as if that Authority had been Absolutely Legal and tho he tells us he does not descend to false Arrests yet I thank him for his Condescension 't is to such a matter as is no way distinguishable from it for an Arrest without Authority is equivalent to a false and is as much Tortius and Force as what is done upon a Forged Warrant The Cases reported by those two Lawyers he cites one of them but a Protonothary that other our great Oracle in my Conscience were never designed for proofs against Passive Obedience By their Resistance here of the Law was never understood that which was forbidden in the Gospel besides it was but the Resolution of the Judges against the * So much were the people possest against the Power of that Court in King Charles the First 's time that 2000. Brownists broke into St. Pauls where It was sitting beat down all the Benches and Bawling No Bishops No Commission Vid. Dugd. view Power of that Court which to be sure they did not care to favour and those two Authorities he has cited none of the best in Matters of Allegiance and Loyalty that part of Coke is looked upon not very favourable to the Government and Brownlow first Printed when there was none But his Triumphant Distinction between his Religion Established by Law and that which has no Law for it's Establishment is not only far from creating a Difference here as I have shown before because the precepts of the Gospel which must be more immutable sure than a Persian decree are still the same and are now the Question but the Offering here of such a distinction is in Truth as impertinently applyed as it is really none at all for whenever he can imagin here which God will avert any Sufferance for the sake of his Religion it must be according to the Law of the Land or else he 'll never be brought to suffer I 'll secure his Carkass for a Farthing and be bound to supply it with my own for the stake if ever his be tyed to it without reviving of the Writ de Comburendo All the Martyrdoms in * In Q. Mâ—râ— Reign first the Parliament supplicated the Pope for pardon and promise a Return to Popery Vid both Baker and Barnet Queen Mary's Reign were but so many Executions of the Law and that Writ de Haeretico he 'll find in Fitz Herbert as well as a Common Capias so that himself must first without Charity which won't sure then begin at home Give his Body to be burnt with his Imply'd suffrage in an House of Commons for I believe He is not likely to be a Bishop before fire and faggot can come upon him to singe his Hair or touch his Garment for the sake of his Religion and how likely we are ever to meet with such a Parliament to Sacrifice themselves again to the Flames himself best knows who I believe does not fear it so that here his Foundation of Law Establishment has nothing to support it and then all his Privileges of Saint Paul his own Magna Charta his Case of Commissions all fall to the Ground and his very supposition of his Religion being Establisht by Law and at the same time against all Law to suffer for it is more contradictory than his Horns or Addresses for it can't be supposed but that the Power that punishes him for an Heretick will have Repealed all those old Laws that would have protected him for being such and enacted new ones to make him suffer for his Perseverance and 't is always remarkable and a great Truth that the laying down one single false Position can never be defended but with as many Lyes And this forces him to maintain the Christians suffer'd contrary to Law in the time of Julian Certainly he knows but little of Justinian and the Codes however his Hunt help't him to so much of our Cases out of Cook The Constitutions of the Jmperial Law were but the Decrees of their Emperors as well as the Corpus the Collection of one of them all the civil Law that governed then is called * Pacius In Instit Prolegom p 1. Caesaria Imperatoria because their Caesars their Emperors where the Authors of it and how can he plead for them their Charters that had nothing else to trust to but the Will and Edict of their Prince The Testamentary Donation of Edward the Sixth he brings for an Argument for Excluding the Right Heir which makes but very little for his own and as much for the cause he contends against not so Insignificant neither as he suggests only because they could not well avoid an Act of Succession in Harry the Eight's time for whether that Act had been
made or not Queen Mary must have Succeeded by Proximity of Blood as next Heir after her Brother And 't was that inherent and unalterable Right that made the Nation the more Zealous in her Cause tho there were enough too as Warm for her Religion he very well knows how that Will was extorted from a weak and dying Prince by the Powerful Importunities of Northumberland for the sake of Jane the Eldest of the House of Suffolk whom one of his younger Sons had Marry'd he knows nothing but self Interest and Ambition promoted it he may Read that both the Learned in the * Sir James Hales Judge Court Com. Pleas Sir John Baker Chancel Excheq Vid. Baker pag. 311. Law and as emiment of the ‖ Goodwin in Vitâ Mariae Divines were against it Bishop Goodwin tells us of Cranmer himself present that he opposed it and that for the same Reasons all good Subjects do now because he thought no pretence of Religion could warrant an excluding the Right Heir This was the Sense of a Protestant so Zealous that he afterward suffer'd for it but the power of the great Northumberland prevailed with him at last for his Consent of which himself afterwards heartily repented to the Queen tells her he never liked it that nothing griev'd him more and that he wish't he could have hinder'd it And the ill success that Attempt had is alone sufficient one would think to discourage such another 'T is strange that the very thing that has once brought a Calamitons War upon the Kingdom that in this very Instance terminated in the Confusion of all the Attempters brought Northumberland to be Executed and to Penitence too for having offended and poor Lady Jane as her self said to suffer justly only for accepting of a Crown so unjustly offer'd 'T is Prodigious that such contradictory Mediums should be urged for countenanceing a thing to which they are so much repugnant Did not a Parliament here of Protestants declare for a Popish Successor and as Bishop Goodwin says the Suffolk men set her up tho they knew her a Papist Did not a Popish Parliament after her death declare for Queen Elizabeth tho they knew her a Protestant and were not in all these sudden Revolutions the Right Heirs still preferr'd notwithstanding their Religion was not the same that was profess'd how then can men that offer at such a piece of Injustice touch upon those times for the Justifying so much wrong where they see that under the same Circumstances they still asserted their Princes Right The next pretty Notion of this Ecclesiastical novice in the Law that we shall now pass our Notes upon is a quaint conceit relating to our Oath of Allegiance what it's form was of old and what he would have implyed in the word HEIR therein mentioned to whom we Julian p. 19 20. 11. swear and here at the same time that he would deliver the poor people as he pretends from the sad delusions of Error and Sophistry does he put upon them the greatest Falsehood and fallacy and the quaintest Sophism a Quirk in Law viz. That the King 's Heir in possibility cannot be meant in our Oath of Allegiance because 't is a Maxim forsooth in our Law * Non est Haeres Viventis that no Man can have an Heir while he is living And with this silly Solaecism a sort of Sense merely Sophisticated this Elaborate Gospeller in the Law lays himself out in the pains of two or three Pages to prove the prettiest Postulate which we would have granted but for an asking that in this our Oath we did not swear Actually Allegiance to the D. of Y. And truly I am much of his opinion too in that point and that he was not then our Soveraign tho he had a possibility to Succeed But can ever a more Senseless Inference be made by a pretender to Sense or a more Jesuitical Evasion by the most dexterous Manager of an Oath First I would ask him what he thinkâ— was the Design of its first Imposition what was the Reason of Inserting including the Kings Heirs and Successors it those Oaths of SVPREMACY and ALLEGIANCE Was it to perpetuate or acknowledge an Hereditary Succession or to warrant an Exclusion of the Right Heirs Did the Parliament design in the framing them the Lineal Discent of the Crown when they Swear to defend the Authority of the Kings Lawful Successor as well as his own or did they then reserve to themselves a power of declaring who should be his Successors by Law But if the Divine Gentleman would have reason'd pertinently and to the purpose tho it would have been but an absurd sort of Reasoning this he must have inferr'd that because we there swear only to be faithful to the Kings Heirs when they come to Succeed therefore this Oath non Obstante we are left at Liberty to prevent any Heir from his Succession and then I would have this Political Casuist tell me What would be the Difference between this Evasion and a direct Perjury for we swear to be faithful to the King's Heir that shall Succeed him and truly in the mean while we make them our own suffer only whom we please or â—ust none at all to Succeed for by the same Law Equity and Reason that we interrupt the Succession of one we may that of one thousand too and still be true to our Oath * And even that is allow'd by Hunt in his Postscript pag. 74. if we abolisht the whole Line of Succession for then those Juglers with a turn of hand and a Presto will tell us very readily why truly we swore to obey his Majesties Heirs and Successors but must needs be absolved now since there are none that do succeed And such were the Casuistical Expositions of some of our Late Divine Assemblies even in this very point when they had Murdered their Prince and denounced Death Vid. Vote of the house in the Journal 1648. to His Heirs and were urged with their Allegiance But is not this first Perjuring themselves to Commit a Crime and then justifieing its Commission by their being Perjur'd May we not as well Murder one that would be the Successor and then plead our Innocence we did not suffer him to Succeed or truly did they not design such an Impious and Execrable countenancing of the Villany when they Associated for his Destruction and swore to destroy him would not they then too have Absolved themselves thus in Johnson's Sense and the Jesuits from any obligation to this his Majesties Heir because the Law Maxim did not yet allow him to be so and they had helpt him now from being so for ever Will a Nice point of this his Law resolve does he think as tender a Case of Conscience This his Law makes it but Manslaughter where a person is kill'd without Malice Propense but will this be no shedding of Blood to be required at his hands by the Judge of