expose not only themselves to be ruin'd but also their Friends and Allies to perish with them in that Case Saevitia est voluisse mori it is a sort of bloody Peaceableness it is cruelty to Mankind to go to that degree of suffering Injuries § 37. But especially when the Cause of God is concern'd to whom we owe all things and ought to venture all for his sake Surely 't is his Cause when it touches Religion which is all that is dear to him in this World And tho' Religion it Self teaches us if it be possible as much as in us lyes to live peaceably with all Men yet as 't is there suppos'd there may be Cause to break the Peace so it adds infinitely to that Cause when it comes to concern our Religion I do not say that Religion is to be propagated with the Sword No nor that Princes may force it on their own Subjects much less upon other Princes or their Kingdoms These are things we justly abhor among those inhumane Doctrins and Practices by which Popery has distinguisht it Self from all other Religions We have the more Cause to abhor it for the sake of a Prince that is the very Scandal of Popery that hath not only exceeded all Heathen Cruelty in the persecuting of his own Protestant Subjects but even forc'd a neighbour Prince to give him Game in his Dominions His butchering the poor Vaudois was barbarity beyond all Example We have reason to believe he would have hunted here next His Dogs had been upon us ' ere this time if God had not wonderfully preserved us God preserve us still from Kings that have that way of propagating Religion § 38. Yet it may be a Question whether such Tyrannies being used on the account of Religion give a just Cause of War to other Princes of the same Religion I speak now of Persecution in such Countries where their Religion is not established by Law It is certainly true which the Apostle says We are all Members of one and the same Body and it is the duty of Members to have the same Care of one another and whether one Member suffer all the Members suffer with it or one Member be honoured all the Members rejoyce with it It is true that Christian Princes especially as they have the charge of that part of Christ's Body that is in their own Dominions so they ought to extend their Care and Compassion to their Fellow-Members elsewhere But whether they ought to concern themselves for them so far as to make War on their account against their Kings by whom they are persecuted nay whether they may lawfully do this is a doubt that may deserve some farther Consideration The Christian Emperors seem to have made no doubt of this For they made War sometimes for no other Cause but that of Religion against such Kings as persecuted the Christians in Their own Dominions Sometimes when they had other Causes of War they preferr'd this before all the rest which certainly they would not have done if it had not weighed much in their Opinion Of them of the Roman Communion there hath been enough already said to shew their Opinion of this Cause They that are for propagating Religion by the Sword cannot but think it a just Cause of War against any Prince that he persecutes those of their Religion We have a notable Instance of this in Cardinal Pool who was one of the moderatest Papists of his age and yet writ a Book wherein he prest it most earnestly upon the Emperor Charles V. as his Duty to give over his War with the Turk and to turn his Arms against King Henry VIII for oppressing the Catholicks in his Dominions Pope Pius V. whom they have lately made a Saint was as earnest with the Emperor Maximilian and with the Kings of Spain France and Portugal He would have them all make War against Queen Elizabeth for persecuting his Catholicks though she never touch'd one of them till that Pope had forc'd her to it by stirring them up to Rebellion against her with his famous Bull of Deprivation § 39. For the Opinion of Protestants in this matter we have it sufficiently declared in the Reign of that excellent Queen who made War first or last against all the Popish Princes in her neighborhood for persecuting the Protestants in their Kingdoms And herein she was not only justified by the Pens of our greatest Lawyers and Divines but she had also the approbation and assistance of our Parliaments and Convocations It appears she was the rather inclin'd to do this by a Jealousy of State for which there was an evident Cause in those Popish Doctrins before-mentioned For she knew that those Kings accounted her and her People to be Hereticks as well as they did their own Subjects whom they used so very ill for no other Cause but because they were of her Religion And therefore she had Reason to fear that when they had done their Work in the destroying of that Religion at home in their own Kingdoms the same blind Zeal acted by the same Principles would bring them hither at last for the finishing of their Work or as some have worded it since for the rooting out of the Northern Heresie This was such a danger that if she had suffer'd it to grow upon her it had been a betraying of her Trust which she could not have answer'd to God And yet there being no way to prevent it but by making War upon them in their own Kingdoms this ought to be accounted a Defensive War and that made upon very just Cause as hath been already shewn We have Reason to hope that all Popish Princes are not under the Power of those Principles But yet when any of them persecutes his Subjects that are of another Religion beyond the standing Laws of his Kingdom they cannot expect that other Princes which are of that Suffering Religion can be so confident of this as to stand idle and look on and not rather when they see the danger comes towards them to defend themselves from it if they can by beginning a War in that Prince's Dominions § 40. There is yet a greater Cause for this when the Suffering Religion is that which is establisht by the Laws of that Kingdom and yet the King that is sworn to those Laws and therefore bound to support that Religion is manifestly practising against it and endeavours to supplant and oppress and extinguish it What should other Princes or States that profess the same Religion do in this Case They see that such a King is set upon the destroying of their Religion He hath declar'd a hostile mind towards the Professors of it in judging them not capable of enjoying their Temporal Rights If he deals thus with his own People what are Forreigners to expect at his hands Can they think themselves secure because they are at Peace with
this case He hath Eleven Points of the Law But beside if as it commonly happens one of the two must be obey'd either he that is driven out or he that comes in his stead the Matter being so doubtful between them then as it seems most reasonable that Obedience should be paid to the latter as having all the Advantage of Law on his side so it is plainly necessary for the Peace and Tranquility of the Nation which cannot well be settled otherwise Thus it was judged by our great Casuist in a Question of Hereditary Right between two or more Competitors that as long as they are yet in Dispute with one another It is the Duty of one that loves his Country to obey him that is in Possession of the Kingdom as his Lawful Prince § 46. Upon this Ground it has been commonly judg'd by the Law of Nations that the Right goes along with the Possession Of this we see Examples in every Revolution that happens in this or any other Kingdom When a King is driven out with any colour of Right the Neighbouring Princes and States make no great Difficulty of applying themselves to him that comes in his stead wherein though perhaps they too much follow their own Interest yet it cannot be said that what they do is against the Law of Nations But what should Subjects do in this Case Of this we have an Example in the People of God when they pass'd successively under the Yoak of those four great Monarchs that were formerly mention'd It is likely that each of those Kings that got the Power over them first declar'd the Cause of the War that he made upon their former Lords In that Case though they could not judge of the Cause whether it was Just of Unjust yet no doubt they did well in adhering to him that was in present Possession Thus we see they did to Darius till such time as they found themselves in the Power of the Enemy but then the same Reason being turn'd on his side they thought it necessary to preserve themselves and their Country by yielding to him who had a Just Cause of War for ought they knew and so far as they could judge by the Success it had Gods Approbation To a People that are in such a case it is no small Comfort that whatsoever doubt they may have of the Cause of the War yet there is no doubt at all concerning their Duty There is nothing more certain than this that they ought to preserve themselves if they can do it Lawfully But it is Lawful for them to forbear Fighting when they are unsatisfied of the Cause And if their own Prince is not able to protect them it is lawful for them to take protection elsewhere Therefore in Case of Invasion for a Cause which is just for ought they know it is lawful for them to live quietly under the Invader nay it is not only Lawful but their Duty as hath been already shewn to acquiesce in his Government when he comes to be in Possession § 47. But when they are certain that a War is made upon their Prince for just Cause that is when they plainly see he hath drawn it upon himself by making it not only Lawful but Necessary for another Prince to invade him for his own Preservation What are the People to do in this Case No doubt they ought first to have a care of their Souls and not to endanger them by being Partakers of other Men's Sins They cannot but see that by engaging in the War they abet their own Prince in his injustice though not in his doing the Injury yet in continuing what is done and in his not giving Reparation And therefore they are subject to the same Punishment with him Nay their Condition is worse then his For he may shift for himself and leave them and all they have to be a Prey to the Enemy Who by right of War may do with them and theirs what he pleases It is therefore certainly their wisest Course to keep themselves free from all Offence both towards God and towards Man That having had no part in the Cause of the War they may not be involv'd in the ill Consequences of it And this they have reason to expect from a Generous Enemy that he will not use the Right of War against them that desire to live peaceably Much more if he hath declar'd he would not hurt them that should not resist him they have Reason to trust a just Prince upon his Declaration And if he went so far as to declare that upon their Submission they should enjoy the benefit of their own Laws then although it should come to a Conquest they may reasonably expect to be in no worse condition under the Stranger then they were under their own Prince They have his Faith engaged to them for this But if the Stranger declares he makes War in defence of another King's Subjects as we have shewn he may lawfully do when he finds himself in danger of suffering by that King's Oppression of his own People in this Case they are first to consider whether it is a meer pretence or whether there be a reall ground for his Declaration If they find there is a just and sufficient ground for it they see in effect that it is through Them that he is struck at and therefore the War is not so much His as their own It is true according to our Doctrine they are united to their Prince as a Wife to her Husband so that they can no more right themselves by Arms then she can sue her Husband while the bond of Mariage continues Yet as when her Husband uses her extremely ill she may complain of him to the Judge who if he see 's Cause may dissolve the Mariage by his Sentence and after that she is at liberty to sue him as well as any other Man So a People may cry to the Lord by Reason of their Oppression and he may raise them up a Deliverer that shall take the Government into his hands a Foreign Prince may lawfully do this as hath been already shewn and then they are not only free to defend themselves but are oblig'd to joyn with Him against their Oppressor For the People's Union with their Prince though it cannot be dissolv'd but by a Sentence from God yet by the Prince's own Act it may be so loosend that it may be next to dissolution The Laws are the Bond of Union between Prince and People By these as the Prince holds his Prerogative so do the People their just Rights and Liberties Now suppose a People so Opprest by their Prince that their Laws being trodden under foot they are in danger of losing not only their Temporal Rights but as much as can be their Eternal In this Case there 's no doubt that the Oppressor and the Oppressed become two Parties being distinguisht by the most different
whither to go on all occasions whether for the asserting of their Rights or reparation of Injuries Their proper recourse is to the KING as Supreme or to those that are Commissioned by him and these are to judge their Cause according to the LAW of the Land which is the common Standard of Justice among private Men. It has been the manner indeed and perhaps is so still in some Nations that where Princes find a Cause too hard for them to decide they give the Parties leave to end it in a Duel between themselves But this being an Appeal to God is most strictly forbidden to Subjects in all well-order'd Kingdoms And this very Usage shews that they have no Right to it otherwise but only by their Princes permission For Sovereign Princes their Rights and their Injuries are inseparably join'd with those of their Kingdoms and Nations And therefore they cannot pass by Injuries as private Men may for Peace sake they must insist on those Rights with which God has entrusted them for others more than themselves it is not only their Interest but their Duty so to do But all Princes being equally concern'd in this matter what if a Question should arise between any two of them or what if one should invade the unquestionable Rights of the other There is no ending the difference between them in the way of private Men for they have no earthly Superior to flie to they have nothing to do with one another's Laws there is no adjusting of their Damages and Costs Private Justice hath Scales to weigh out these things but publick Justice has none Therefore Princes must have some other way to come by their Rights or else they are in much worse Case than private Men. But what Way should that be by which Princes can be oblig'd against their Wills to do Right to one another It must be by such a LAW as they all agree to and by such a JUDGE as is their common Superior Such a Law is that which we call the Law of Nations being made up of such Customs as are observ'd among Princes as our Common Law is made up of those that are observ'd in this Kingdom And for that common Superior it is God alone who styles himself the King of Kings and Lord of Lords But as by the Law of Nations the Way that Princes have for the ending of those differences among themselves which cannot be ended otherwise is by War So this as hath been already shewn is an Appeal to God it is the Way that Princes have to sue one another in his Court. And he has therefore given them the Power of the Sword that they may use it not only in Judging their own People but in going to Law with other Princes This confirms that which has been said already that Subjects have no Right to make War without the leave of their Princes For as God has given Princes the Power of the Sword so he forbids it to Subjects under a great Penalty They that take the Sword shall perish with the Sword And if he has not admitted them to be Parties in his Court then it is certain that they cannot sue there or if they do they can acquire no Right by it There is an Original Nullity in all their Proceedings As none have right of making War but they that are in Sovereign Power so neither is it given to them that they may make what use of it they please Particularly they must not make War for the satisfying of their Lusts Ambition Covetousness Vain-glory or the like He that troubles an earthly Court of Justice upon any litigious or trifling Account ought to be condemned in good Costs But if it appear he comes thither to defraud or to oppress and that with a Colour of Justice he must look for greater Severity How much more ought Princes to dread the just Judgment of God if they presume to Appeal to him for no Cause or for such as he hates and abhors Nay the righteous God will not hold him guiltless that hath Justice in his Cause and yet in his Heart hath no such thing Lawful things must be done lawfully This Princes must look to as they will answer it to God 35. But as far as Man can judge it is a Lawful War that is made for a just and sufficient Cause which is the third Thing we are to consider To make a Cause just in strictness of Law a very small matter may suffice For no Man hath right to do another the smallest Injury any more than he hath to do him the greatest And Princes have no other way than by War to right themselves for the least Injury But if they are so tame to pass by the smallest Injuries it will tempt ill-minded Men to go on and to do greater These and many other things may be said to make it seem reasonable that Princes should insist upon the rigor of Justice But after all this we must remember we are Christians and Christ hath given us other measures of Justice according to which even Princes ought to govern themselves He hath taught us to soften the rigor of Justice with a Temperament of Goodness and Equity And therefore not to run to Extremes for the righting of any small any tolerable Injury § 36. Especially War that is such an Extreme as a wise and good Prince would not run into if he could with a good Conscience live out of it But that he cannot do without the leave of other Princes that do not consider it with so great an Aversation They may make it Necessary for him to defend his just Rights which he cannot forego without wronging his Conscience They may force him to it if they will with insupportable Injuries They may bring things to that pass that the dangers of Peace may be worse than the mischiefs of War are like to be If it once come to that that there is more danger in sitting still than there is like to be in the hazards of War then it is time for them to draw the Sword to whom it is given And to do it first if they can to prevent the danger of doing it too late afterwards They may do it Se defendendo as well against great and imminent danger as against open actual Invasion They may do it in defence of another King's Subjects if they see themselves in extreme danger of suffering an intolerable Injury by his Oppression of his own People And in these Cases if one Lawfully may then it is certain he ought to do it There needs no Scripture for this it is the plain natural Law of Self-preservation They are so much the more oblig'd to this when it is evident that the threatning mischief is like to fall upon others as well as themselves and them such as they are bound in Honour and Conscience to protect and support When by sitting still they should certainly
him They cannot unless Treaties are more Sacred then Laws Or can they rely upon his Oath But they see he hath broken it And therefore they have reason to Judge that either he makes no Conscience of an Oath or he thinks Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks or he hath a Superior that can dispense with him or that will absolve him from the guilt of Perjury in such Cases where Religion is concern'd In short they are sure of his Will to destroy them and cannot be sure of his Oath to the contrary Wherein then can they be safe But in his Want of Power to do them hurt But he will not want Power if they let him go on for he is getting it as fast as he can He is now strengthning himself by those ways that he takes to be absolute Lord of his own People And he is now weakning Them by oppressing all those among his People whom he knows to be their Friends and Well-wishers He doth both these things together He daily lessens their Party and makes them as many more Enemies as he gains Men over to his Religion And if that be such a Religion as pretends to a Right of destroying Men of other Religions knowing this they know what they are to expect When this pretended Right is armed with Power it will certainly fall upon them So that they must begin before he is ready for them or else it will be too late to do any thing for their own Preservation But as it is necessary for them to do this for themselves so they ought to do it much the rather for the Sakes of their oppressed Brethren That by a timely asserting of their own Right they may also deliver them from the Evils they suffer at present and save them from that Destruction which is coming upon them As it was Just and Necessary on those former Accounts so this makes it a Pious Cause and therefore the more Worthy of a true Christian Prince It has been judg'd so by them whose Names we have in great Veneration We have the Examples of our own Princes here in England in the best of Times since the Reformation These the Reader may find collected to his Hand in an excellent Book that hath been lately published But this may as well be shewn in the Examples of them whom our Princes chose to follow as their Patterns namely of the Christians in Primitive times and especially at the time of the first Nicene Council In these times we find that Constantine and Licinius having shar'd the Roman Empire between them had pass'd a Decree together at Milan for Christianity to be the establish'd Religion And when afterward Licinius in his part of the Empire would have oppress'd it contrary to Law for that cause Constantine the Great made War upon him and in prosecution of that War thrust him out of his Empire For which he was so far from being blamed by any Christian in those times even by those that had been Licinius's Subjects as most of those Bishops were that sate in the Nicene Council that they all gave him the highest Praises and Encomiums and Blessed God that had sent them that happy Deliverance by his means Eusebius was Licinius's Subject and he afterwards writ the Life of Constantine the Great in which they that please may read whole Chapters to this purpose § 41. As that is a Just War which is made upon Just and sufficient Cause so the Effect of such a War being a Conquest is Just which is the Fourth thing we are to consider Conquest being the way by which a Kingdom or Dominion is taken from a Sovereign Prince against his Will and by which another Prince gets it into his Possession as often as this happens there arises a Question between the two Princes whether of them hath a Right to that Kingdom or Dominion For the deciding of this Question it must be by such a Law as is common to both the Parties whose Rights are to be judg'd by it That cannot be the Law of the Kingdom for though the Prince that is disseiz'd was obliged by that Law while he was in Possession yet now it seems he is not and it never was a Law to the Prince that is now in his place It must therefore be a Superior Law such as is common to all Sovereign Princes in their Affairs with one another and that as hath been already shewn is ordinarily the Law of Nations I say Ordinarily because there is yet a Superior Law namely the Law of God whether written in our Hearts which we commonly call the Law of Nature or whether an express Revelation from God such as was sometimes given to Men in ancient Times either of these may derogate from the Law of Nations For this being made up of Customs observ'd by Princes and States among themselves is always subject to the will of him that is Lord of Lords and King of Kings But whether or how far this may alter the case will be considered afterwards at present we are only to consider what Judgment can be made of it according to the Law of Nations § 42. By this it seems to be plain that the Right should go along with the compleat Possession So as that wheresoever this is once settled whether by length of time or even sooner by a general Consent of the People there it ought to be presum'd there is a Right at least there ought to be no farther Dispute of it There seems to be the same Reason for this that there is for the Law of Nations it self for if that Law was ordain'd for the Peace of Mankind this quieting of Possession must be a part of it for there can be no end of Wars otherwise Accordingly we see in a Dispute between Gods Ancient People the Jews and the Heathen Nations about them when they differ'd about a Title to Land it was agreed that whatsoever Conquest they had made on either side they should hold it as being given them by their God This appears by Jephtha's Speech to the King of Ammon that had Chemosh for his God Wilt not thou possess that which Chemosh thy God giveth thee to possess So whomsoever the Lord our God shall drive out from before us them will we possess That 's a plain Evidence so far as it goes But that is only for part of a Country But we have as great Proof that God gives even Kingdoms in this manner Dan. II. 21. There Daniel having receiv'd a full Account from God of a Vision which King Nebuchadnezzar had seen and forgot when he saw what it was that it contain'd the Fates of Empires that were to grow up successively in the World he adores the Majesty of God with an humble Confession of his Prerogative in these words It is He that changes the Times and the Seasons It is He that removes Kings and sets up Kings Both these ways of Expression
signifie one and the same thing For the Chaldeans reckon'd the Times and the Seasons by the Years of their Kings Reigns as we do by the Years of our Kings Reigns at this day And therefore according to the Change of their Kings there was also a change of the Times and the Seasons They were the Changes of Four great Empires which God here considered not as being the greatest in the World but as being those to which his People were to be subject They were subject successively to those Four great Empires of the Babylonians the Persians the Greeks and the Romans Those Four are understood in this Vision by Josephus and by all the Jews that have written and by all the Primitive Christians But these words being so understood afford us a plain Instance of this Doctrine They shew that it is by way of Conquest that God puts down one and sets up another For so the Babylonian Empire was put down by Cyrus who set up the Persian in its stead The Persian Empire was put down in their last King Darius and Alexander set up the Macedon in its stead The Macedon Kingdom was put down in their last King Perseus and the Roman was set up in its stead All these Kingdoms were changed by Conquests that they made one upon another And so it was by those Conquests that God removed Kings and set up Kings Which though we see not yet that it was any more than by the Permissive Providence of God yet that was enough to make the People of God become Subjects to those Kings that came in by no other Title I do not say but they would have opposed the making of one of those Conquests namely that of Alexander the Great because King Darius was then living But when they saw they could not Oppose the Conquest being already made then Just or Unjust they submitted to it and having submitted they were subject without any more Controversie Therefore also Just and Religious Kings have reckoned their Conquests 〈◊〉 the great things that God wrought in 〈◊〉 means and accounted them as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subjects whom they had gain'd by 〈◊〉 Sword as them that were born in thâ—â—â— Dominions Therefore also God hath commanded his People to give Obedience to the Kings that came in by Conquest without any other Title Nay to such as were capable of no other for they were forbidden to set a Stranger over them which was not their Brother And yet they were Subjects to Strangers such as Cushan Eglon and Jabin c. And in Zedekia's time God commanded them upon pain of Death to become the Subjects of Nebuchadnezzar who had made a full Conquest over them and held their Lawful King Jeconia then in Captivity This is plainly the Doctrine of that Convocation which sate in the beginning of King James I. his time and therefore it cannot but be very Unjust to charge any Man with Singularity or Novelty that goes in the Steps of so many and so great Authors § 43. Yet it cannot be denied that many others and those also Men of great Learning and Judgment have not gone on so smooth with this Doctrine they think it gives too much to the Success of a War without due regard to the Cause on which it was made But it is the Cause that makes a War either Just or Unjust And though the Events of both these may be the same for either of them may end in a Conquest by which God puts down one and sets up another yet whether this be Justly obtained or Unjustly it makes a great Difference For whereas the latter happens through the Judgment of God for the Punishing of a Sinful Prince or Nation it doth not appear that he that is the Instrument of this acquires any Right by it more that those Pirates or Robbers who are Instrumental likewise in the Punishing of Inferior Transgressors And if God gives no Right to him whom he sets up then it remains still in him whom he has put down So that he is rightful King still though he is out of Possession and the other is but an Usurper that is in Possession In this Case if the Usurper has no Pretence of Right no Prescription of time no Consent of the People but only an unjust Possession how a Subject ought to behave himself towards him even this is a DIFFICULT QUESTION in a most learned Man's Judgment Who yet Judges that even here it may be not only Lawful but a Duty to obey him that is in Possession when the Legal King is reduced to that pass that he can no more do the Office of a King to his People For saith he the Kingdom cannot be without Government and if the Usurper preserves the Kingdom a Lover of his Country ought not as things are to give any farther cause of trouble by his unprofitable Contumacy But then put case the Usurper hath Sworn the People to him and doth the Office of a King which it seems in his Judgment doth not take away the Duty that is owing to that former King how one can pay his Duty to both the expel'd Legal King and to such an Usurper This our Author says is A MOST DIFFICULT SCRUPLE and so it seems both by his and our most Learned Casuist's handling the Question where they shew how far one ought and how far one ought not to comply with such an Usurpation But these Difficulties are only in case the Possession is obtained by a War that was certainly unjust for if the Cause of the War was but doubtful and a Conquest follows upon it there is no place for these Difficulties Much less where the cause of War was certainly Just for if a Conquest follows upon this it gives a Right and then there is no Usurpation § 44. We judge of doubtful things by those that are certain and therefore to speak of these first Being certain that the Cause of War is Just we are as certain of the Effect of it So that if it be suffer'd to run on to a Conquest this also is Just and we ought to look upon it as the Execution of a Sentence of God by which acting as a Judge in the way of Justice he puts down one and sets up another And this being follow'd by the Peoples attorning their Allegiance the Right is as fully settled in him that comes in in this manner as if he came in by the ordinary way of Succession § 45. The Right of a Conquest being so clear when the Justice of the War is certain there is the less to be said of the Case when there is a doubtful Cause of War If the Effect of such a War be a Conquest it is evident that the Right of this Conquest ought to be judged of very favourably for he that hath Conquered is now in Possession And therefore according to that common Saying which is most true in
to be his Faithful Subjects and this subsequent Act gives him a LAWFUL RIGHT TO THE MONARCHY b Andrews on the Commandements Lond. 1650. p. 331. Kingdoms when they are obtained by a Just Conquest are not to be accounted Tyrannical because they are Just for there may be A JUST TITLE BY CONQUEST when the War is upon Just Grounds Ib. p. 461. Besides those original ways of Propriety there is also a Propriety by the Right of War or Law of Arms because the Magistrate hath Power and Authority to use his Sword abroad as well as at home and may punish a Foreign Enemy in some cases even by expelling him his Land and in this Right of Propriety he hath not only Dominium the Lordship and Dominion over it but Usum the use also Sanderson Oblig Consc. VII 17. Speaking of them that come into Government vi armis saith they come in either by meer Usurpation without any pretence of Right or by making Just War upon their Enemies by whom they are unjustly provoked Ib. VII 24. He saith BY THE LAW OF NATIONS that Power of a Prince is Just which is either gotten by Just War or which by long Possession is confirm'd as by a Right of Prescription Bramhall's Works p. 527. Those whose Predecessors OR THEMSELVES have attain'd to Sovereignty by the Sword by a Conquest in a Just War claim immediately from God Ib. p. 537. Just Conquest in a Lawful War acquireth good Right of Dominion as well as Possession Neither is this to alter the Course of Nature or frustrate the Tenor of Law but it self is THE LAW OF NATURE AND NATIONS A doubtful Cause is enough for the Prince in Possession a Sanderson de Oblig Consc. V. 15. Where among the Examples of such Competitors he mentions that very sharp and long Dispute that was between the two Houses of York and Lancaster concerning the Succession of this Kingdom in which according to his Judgment a good Patriot ought to have obeyed the King that was in Possession And thus he concludes IT IS CERTAIN BY THE CONSENT OF ALL NATIONS ALL THE WORLD OVER that the Laws every where not only that of 11 Hen. VII but the Laws EVERY WHERE have favour'd him that is in Possession and in such Cases that Famous Sentence of the Lawyers has always carried it In rebus dubiis melior est conditio possidentis a See §. 42. The People ought to be satisfied with this b See §. 42. Albericus Gentilis de Jure Belli III. f. C. blames Lucan for calling Alexander Orbis Terrarum Praedonem For saith he Alexander declar'd a Just Cause of War and when he had the Victory that then he might possess himself of his Enemies Dominions is MORE THEN A RECEIVED OPINION Alexander's Reasons are express'd in his Epistle to Darius which is in Arrian Exped Alex. II. a See § 45. But much more with a certain just Cause b See § 36. a See Grot. de Jure B. P. III. 13. 4. and 15. 12. b See §. 36. a See §. 25. Jud. II. 18. and IV. 3. Jud. III. 9 15 b §. 36. When the Cause is for their Sake it is to them not a Conquest but a Deliverance a Calvin's Law-Dictionary has this sense of the word Evictio est ejus rei quam Adversarius legitimo jure acquisierat per Judicem recuperatio In this Sense it seems to have been us'd in speaking of the fall of Maxentius whereof see the following Note b §. 46 47. a See §. 42. Note a. In memory of his Victory over Maxentius the day on which it happen'd being the 27th of October was styl'd in the Christian Roman Calendar Evictio Tyranni what that means See in the former Note On the Arch which was set up in memory of it and which is yet to be seen at Rome there is Inscrib'd CONSTANTINO MAXIMO c. LIBERATORI URBIS FUNDATORI QUIETIS See Grut. Inscr. p. 282. In his Coins he is call'd RESTITUTOR LIBERTATIS CONSERVATOR URBIS SUAE and AFRICAE SUAE c. See Mediobarbus Likewise upon the overthrow of Maximinus the joy and thanksgiving of Christians for their Deliverance See in Euseb. hist. X. 1 and 2. And see his Panegyric to Paulinus Bishop of Tyre esp p. 378. of Valesius Edition and remember that both these were Subjects of that Emperor Maximinus Of the joy of Christians upon their Deliverance from the Tyranny of Licinius enough hath been said in §. 40. Acts of Parliament and Convocation in Queen Elizabeth's time by which it appears as hath been already said in §. 39. that in the Wars that She made on the account of Religion She had both their approbation and assistance V o. Eliz. A. D. 1562. In the Convocation that fram'd the 39 Articles The Prelates and Clergy being Lawfully congregated calling to remembrance c. and finally pondering the inestimable charges sustain'd by Your Highness in reducing the Realm of Scotland to Unity and Concord as also in procuring as much as in Your Highness lies by all kind of Godly and prudent means the abateing of all hostility and Persecution within the Realm of France practis'd and used against the Professors of God's holy Gospel and true Religion hath given and granted c. A Bill of Subsidy in Rastall's Collection II. p. 84. Edit Lond. 1618. XIII o. Eliz. A. D. 1571. When the Parliament enjoyn'd the subscribing of those Articles The Prelates and Clergy c. considering farther the inestimable Charges sustain'd by Your Highness in procuring by all Godly and prudent means the abating of all Hostility and Persecution within the Realm of France and in other Places practis'd against the Professors of God's holy Gospel and true Religion have given and granted as follows Rastall Ib. p. 167. XLIII o. Eliz. A. D. 1601. In her Convocation a Subsidy was granted by the Clergy with this reason exprest For who should have a more lively sence of Your Majesty's princely Courage and Constancy in advancing and protecting the free profession of the Gospel within and without Your Majesty's Dominions then the Clergy Rastall Ib. p. 520. XXXV o. Eliz. There was a Subsidy granted by the Temporalty together with an acknowledgment of the Great Honor which it hath pleas'd God to give Your Majesty abroad in France and Flanders in making You the Principal Support of all just and Relegious Causes against Usurpers So that this Island hath in Your Majesty's days been a Pray and Sanctuary to distressed States and Kingdoms and is a Bulwark against the Tirannies of mighty and usurping Potentates Rastall Ib. p. 421. XXXIX o. Eliz. There is another Subsidy granted to that Queen by the Temporalty almost in the same words Rastall Ib. p. 479.