Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	king_n	people_n	power_n	4,914	5	5.4287	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79833	The golden rule, or, Justice advanced. Wherein is shewed, that the representative kingdom, or Commons assembled in Parliament, have a lawfull power to arraign, and adjudge to death the King, for tyranny, treason, murder, and other high misdemeanors: and whatsoever is objected to the contrary from Scripture, law, reason, or inconveniences, is satisfactorily answered and refuted. Being, a cleer and full satisfaction to the whole nation, in justification of the legal proceeding of the High Court of Justice, against Charls Steward, late King of England. The first part. / By John Canne.	Canne, John, d. 1667?	1649 (1649)	Wing C440; Thomason E543_6; ESTC R204183	32,291	40

of God and men therefore not within the limits of this text and therefore to be resisted and the Person punishable 4. Howsoever the lawfull power of Princes be of God yet the tyranny it self and abuse of this power is of Satan and therefore though the power it self which is good and profitable be to be honored and continued yet the tyrant justly may be condemned to death as not within the compasse of this text 13. Obje And thus much for the first sort of Objections we come now to the rest Kings some say are in dignity and power above tho people their persons sacred not criminal or obnoxious to any tribunal but that of God King Theodor. in Cassidore speaking of himself Cassi var. l. 6 var. 4. hac sola ratione discreti quod alteri subdi non possimus qui Judices non habemus In this respect we are distinguished from others that we cannot be subject to another who have no Judges over us Impune quidvis facere id est Regem esse I have read in Plutarch that Alexander Magnus published he was the son of Jupiter Hammon yet when he saw the humor running down from his wounds was constrained to say this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the blood of man not of God and smelling the stench of his own flesh asked his flatterers if the gods yeelded such a stench Princes specially of late have deem'd themselves to be None-such and altogether unlike other men but when they shall see themselves as prisoners stand at the bar and justice don upon them they will think otherwise of their condition I know what the common saying is Quidquid delirant Reges plectuntur Achivi What fault soever Kings commit The subject must be hang'd for it A practice against Scripture reason and conscience It is no Law grounded upon any divine principle That the King doth no wrong only his wicked Councellers and bad instruments must be punished but he not the Lord saith the soul that sinneth it shall dy and in all ages hath punished the author of sin and persons commanding such and such wickednesse more severely and extreamly then the agent who acted by the others warrant commission and authority We see dayly the mother punished for her whordom yet the bastard spared but that the bastard should suffer and the mother escape it is such a thing as I think was never heard of Now touching the objection I answer 1. Simply absolutely the people are above and more excellent then the King and the King in dignity inferior to the people and the whole Kingdom and this I prove 2 Sam. 19.9 Psa 78.70.71 1 Sa. 10,1 Ro. 13.4 1. Because he is the mean ordained for the people as for the end that he may save them a publick shepheard to feed them the captain and leader of the Lords inheritance to defend them the Minister of God for their good 2. The pilot is lesse then the whole passengers the General lesse then the whole Army the physitian lesse then all the living men whose health he careth for the Master or Teacher lesse then all the Schollers because the part is lesse then the whole The King is but a part or member of the Kingdom 3. Those who are given of God as gifts for the preservation of the people to be nursing-Fathers to them those must be of lesse worth before God then those to whom they are given for the gift as a gift is lesse then the party on whom the gift is bestowed But the King is a gift for the good and welfare of the people as is manifest Esa 1.26 4. People though mortal in the individuals yet in the species cannot dye Ecc. 1.4 but the King as King may and doth die and therefore more excellent then that which is accidental temporary and mortal 5. The people are before the King and may be without the King and therefore must be of more worth then that which is posterior and cannot be a King without them 2. The people in power are superior to the King and that upon these reasons 1. Because every efficient and constituent cause is more excellent then the effect every mean is inferior in power to the end But the people are the efficient cause the King is the effect Isa 3.7 the people are the end both intended of God to save the people to be a healer and physitian to them 2. Common reason Law and experience manifests that the whole or greatest part in all politick or natural bodies is of greater power and jurisdiction then any one particular member Thus in all corporations the Court of Aldermen and Common-Councel is of greater power then the Major alone though the chief officer so the whole Bench then the Lord chief Justice and the whole Councel then the President And it is Aristotle's expresse determination Pol lib. 1 C. 2. l. 3. c. 8. Majorum rerum potest as jure populo tribuitur The King as we sayd just now is but a part or member though I grant a very noble and eminent member of the Common-wealth 3. The Soveraign Power to make Laws and so a power eminent in their states representative to govern themselves is in the people Ergo 4. Those who can limit power and bind royal power in elected Kings they in power are superior to Kings Peter speaking of Kings and their Supremacy cals them a creature or humane ordinance because it took its originall and rise from men and can be bound limitted or restrained as they see occasion 1 Pe 2.13 Coverrunias a great Lawyer saith Cover Tom. 2. pra quest c. 1. n. 2. 3. That all civil power is penes remp in the hands of the Common-wealth and it is a received principle That Soveraign Power eminently fontaliter originally and radically is in the people But it is objected The people have made over their right and whole power to the King all is freely given up into his hands and so may not retract or take back what they have once given Answ 1. It is a thing neither probable nor credible that any free people when they voluntarily incorporated themselves into Kingdoms and of their own accord set up an elective King over them that there was such a stupidity and madnesse in them as absolutely to make away their whole power to the King and his heirs for ever and to give him an entire full and incontroulable Supremacy over them and so to make the Creature superior to the Creator the derivative greater then the primative the servant more potent than themselves and so of free-men to make themselves slaves and for their more safety to be more enslav'd 2. People cannot by the Law of nature resign up their soveraign and popular power authority and right into the hand of a King for neither God nor natures Law hath given them any such power 3. He who constituteth himself a slave is supposed to

change upon their persons neither set them at any distance touching subjection to the Law either active or passive more then they were before their personal estate was the same still as before neither are they exempted from corporall punishment if they break the Law more then any other men 2. objec It is further objected Exod. 22.28 Thou shalt not revile the gods nor curse the Ruler of thy people Again Ecc. 10.20 Curse not the King no not in thy thoughts and curse not the rich in thy bed-chamber If Kings may not be curs'd much less put to death by their Subjects Answ 1. The first text is not properly meant of Kings but pertains rather to Judges and other sort of Rulers and so the Jew Doctors understand the place 2. Solomon well explains the place Prov. 17.26 It is not good to strike Princes for equity that is evil speaking of Magistrates for well doing is a wicked and vile thing Hier. in hunc ver ● 3. The other text by some is applyed unto Christ the King of his Church But take it literally because Kings may not be curs'd which is prohibited under pain of condemnation will it therefore follow that Kings may be theeves murderers traytors tyrants and commit any wickednesse and not be cal'd to an account by such who are above them and have a lawfull Power in their hands to punish them 4. The place comprehends Rich-men as well as Kings and therefore it may be as well concluded from it that no man if rich may be punished for any crime or fault whatsoever 5. Both these if rightly applyed are altogether for us for whosoever whether King or Prince shall curse and revile the Supream and Soveraign State of the Land and that for well doing as call them Rebels and Traytors and violently seek to destroy them he absolutely violateth this Law Thou shalt not revile the gods It is true there is here no punishment set down for him that should thus rail But seeing as one writes on the place Willet Qu. 57. he that railed on his father and mother was to die for it Exod. 21.17 much more worthy of death was he which should curse the fathers of the Countrey 3. objec I counsell thee to keep the Kings commandment and that in regard of the oath of God Be not hasty to go out of his sight stand not in an evill thing for he doth whatsoever pleaseth him Where the word of a King is there is power and who may say to him What dost thou Ecc. 8.2,3,4 Hence the Royallists argue If the word of a King must stand and his power not to be resisted how can his Subjects lawfully touch his Person Answ 1. To keep the Kings commandment must be understood of things just and lawfull otherwise as the Apostle saith We must obey God rather than man It is well laid down by Philo Philo de vita Mosis Regis officium est jubere quae oportet fieri vetare a quibus abstinere debet caeterum jussie faciendorum interdictio cavendoru m proprie ad Legem pertinet Atque ita consequitur ut Rex animata sit Lex vero sit Rex justissimus The office of a King is to command those things which ought to be don and to forbid those things which ought to be avoyded But the command of things to be don and the forbidding of things not to be don properly belongeth to the Law And so it followeth that a King is a living Law and the Law is a most just King 2. The oath of God here is the oath which is taken in the name of God and whereof God is made a witnesse The meaning is the King is so to be obeyed as that God is not to be disobeyed and that the oath made to the King is so to be kept as that the oath made to God be not broken Hence Tremellius reads it sed pro ratione juramenti Dei but with regard to the oath of God shewing that Subjects are by their Allegeance and Covenant no further obliged to observe the Laws of earthly Princes then are agreeable to Gods commandments 3. Whereas it is said He doth whatsoever pleaseth him this must be understood only of a good King and just cōmands as if it were supplyed with whatsoever pleaseth God not licet si libet as if all were lawfull whatsoever a King should do but the genuine sence of the place is stand not in an evill matter for the King hath power to do whatsoever he pleaseth in way of justice to punish thee if thou continue obstinate in evil courses to forgive thee if thou confesse submit and crave pardon of him for the same 4. Who may say to him what dost thou that is reprove or censure him for doing justly as Job expounds it Chap. 34 18. and so must the place be understood to wit that no man may presume to question the Kings just actions warranted by the Law of God and men but otherwise Kings may and are to be reprehended as we have sundry examples for it in Elias reproving Ahab Elisha Jehoram Nathan David John Baptist Herod 1 Sam. 13.13 2 King 3.14 Jer. 1● 28. chap. 22.3 Ho. 5.1.2 Yea not only so but to be resisted withstood and opposed in their unrighteous courses Hence Augustine and Ambrose do affirm Augu. in Psal 82. Amb. in Offic. when Herod and Pilate condemned Christ and caused him to be put to death howsoever the people lamented it were sorry for him and sorely bewail'd his death yet were they all punished and why so because when they were able and might have taken him out of the hands of unjust and wicked Magistrates and so preserv'd his life they did it not in this regard they wrapt themselvs in the same guilt of blood and became murderers of him But lastly This text intends only private men not a Parliament the supreamest Judicatory and Soveraign power in the Kingdom for in this High Court the Kings Person is no other than another subject I say it again to this Court He personally stands as a single man to be questioned censured punished as the Crime and Cause shall be And in truth here lies the stone at which many have stumbled much like to that long controversie between us and the Church of Rome about Petros and Petra Peter and the Rock We distinguish them taking the person of Peter to be one thing his faith or Christ another Whereas the Papists will allow of no such distinction So the Title and Office of a King is one thing the Person another and howsoever the former comes not into question yet the latter may But many by mixing and confounding things together which should be severed and distinguished apprehend not how the Person of the King and not the Title and Office of a King can be questioned censured and punished Hugo Grotius putting down seven cases in which the people may have most real action against the

us our sins as we forgive them that sin against us For there is no reason from the nature of sin and the nature of Gods Law why we can say more the subjects and sons sin against the King and Father then to say the Father and King sin against the sonnes and subjects 3. The King killing his Father Jesse should sin only against God but not break the fift commandment nor sin against his Father 2. As all Emperors Kings and Princes are subject to the Lawes of God of nature and Nations so are they bound in conscience to give satisfaction and recompence to their subjects against whom they sin in this nature and David himself determines so much in his own cause And Davids anger was greatly kindled against the man the man was himself 1 Sam. 12.7 thou art the man and he said to Nathan as the Lord liveth the man that hath don this shall surely die 3. For the reason of Davids speech in saying against thee thee only have I sinned Expositors are diversly minded some say he meaneth none durst judge or punish him but God onely Lorinus the Jesuit observeth eleven interpretations of Ancient writers all to this sence It is true Beda Euthymius Ambrose Chrysostome Basil Theodoret do acknowledge from the place de facto there was none above David to judge him so Augustine Basil Gregory Arnobius Dydimus Hieronim But the simple meaning is Against thee only 1. As my eye witnesse and immediate beholder for he conceal'd his sin from men but could not from God 2 Sam. 12.12 2. Because as the cause stood God only could remit the punishment of his sin 3. By only he means comparatively as if he should say principally and especially against thee Isa 43 5 Psal 41.3 and the word a 1 King 15.7 Josh 1.7.18 1 Sam. 18.17 only is often so taken 4. The Sanedrim did not punish David Ergo it was not lawful for them nor is it lawfull for a State to punish a King for any act of injustice is logick which we may resist 5. Had the adultery and murder been publickly known and complained of to the Great Councel of the Kingdom I do affirm and will stand to it that they might judicially have proceeded against him for it And because some wil be ready to brand this under the scornful terme of a new light or think I am singular herein I shall here set down the judgment of a judicious and learned professor of Divinity Mr. Sam. Rutherfurd a Scotchman Preem of Elect of King qu 26 p 241 The Prelate saith he draweth me to speak of the case of the Kings unjust murder confessed Psal 51. To which I answer He taketh it for confessed that it had been treason in the Sanedrin and States of Israel to have taken on them to judge and punish David for his adultery and murder but he giveth no reason for this nor any word of God and truly though I will not presume to go before others in this Gods law Gen. 9.6 compared with Numb 35.30,31 seemeth to say against them Nor can I think that Gods law Deut 1,17 2 Chr. 19 6,7 or his deputy the Judges are to accept the persons of the great because they are great and we say we cannot distinguish where the Law distinguisheth not The Lord speaks to under-Judges Levit. 19.15 Thou shalt not respect the person of the poor nor the honor of the person of the mighty or of the PRINCE for we know what these names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaneth I grant it is not Gods meaning that the King should draw the sword against himself but yet it follows not that if we speak of the demerit of blood that the Law of God accepteth any Judge great or small and if the STATE BE ABOVE THE KING as I conceive they are though it be a humane politick constitution that the King is free from all coaction of law because it conduceth for the peace of the Common-wealth yet if we make a matter of conscience FOR MY PART I SEE NO EXCEPTION THAT GOD MAKES OF IT if men make I crave leave to say A facto ad jus non sequitur Thus that Reverend Author Lastly This sin against Vrijah was personal and a private injury into which David fell by occasion and out of humane frailty it was the first and only sin that he committed in this kind that ever we reade of he made no trade of it he repented for it and never relapsed after into it Whereas Charles Steuart in a hostile and publick way hath murdered many thousands of his best subjects by giving Warrants and Commissions under his own hand to Atheists and Papists personally appeared in many battles to destroy the people caused sundry villages towns and cities to be ruinated by fire plunder rapine authorised villanous Pirates of other nations not to mention his own Son nor Rupert that monster of mankind to rob and kill his own subjects at sea gave Ormond commission and the bloody Irish to kill and massacre not so few as two hundred thousand men women and children of the Protestant religion in Ireland not to speak of fifteen hundred widowes which he made in one morning as Mr. Henderson told him nor the losse of Rochel in France by his lending ships to the French King and this was his trade and constant practice many yeers together and doubtlesse would have continued so to this day had not the Lord of Hosts by a powerfull hand using our Army as instrumental means supprest him and for all this his heart never smote him as it could be perceived but remain'd impenitent and incorrigeble in his sins 9. obiect It is likewise objected Jer. 29,7 That the children of Israel were commanded by God himself to pour out supplications prayers for the peace and prosperous estate of Nebuchadnezer a most cruel tyrant and that it was not lawfull for the Jewes to withdraw themselves from the subjection which they did owe unto his Empire Neither would the Lord authorize the people to deliver themselves from under Pharaoh but made Moses a Prince to bring them out of Egypt with a stretched out arm Nor did the Lord deliver his People by the wisdom of Moses or strength of the People or any act that way of theirs but by his own immediate hand and Power Hence conclude that subjects may not punish their Kings for any misdemeanour Answ 1. The Jews were not only subjects and of a private condition but likewise most of them servants and bond-men under the power and Empire of the Caldeans and therefore for private men to rise up against the Magistrates or to resist them with force of arms had been unlawfull 2. And let it be observed that the Jews came by the immediate appointment of the Lord under the power of the Caldeans of which thing they were often preadmonished and fore-told by the Prophets so that it was not only

doth not only concern Christians but all the people under these Emperours and howbeit Religion was persecuted the peoples Liberty lost and the Senate then enslaved by Edict and Laws inforced on them by Nero and other Emperors yet notwithstanding the Apostle forbids to resist That I may give a satisfactorie answer to this Objection I desire the Reader to consider the occasion of the Apostles words which I take to be thus The Roman Magistrates being Infidels people newly converted to Christian Religion might think themselves exempted from any subjection or obedience unto them by reason of Gospel-liberty and further that it was not lawful for them to make use of such Magistrates in any civil cause what wrong soever they suffered To refute which error the Apostle informs them that howbeit the Magistrates were unbeleeving Gentiles yet their authority and power was from God Himself and in that regard their profession of Christianity did rather obleige them then exempt them from subjection and they were Gods Ministers appointed by him to punish offenders and to take vengeance on them Now bring this into an argument because Religion exempts not subjects from due obedience to lawful pagan Magistrates and people oppressed may seek redresse of their grievances therefore Tyrants may not be legally arraigned censured and put to death by the highest and supremest Court of the Kingdom 2. If the Apostles words be observed even word for word there is not any thing in them against the arraignment of a tyrant For 1. The Higher Powers must be submitted to and why Because they are ordained of God and are Gods ordinances vers 1 2. That is so far as they govern according to reason and just laws preserve their Peoples liberties persons and estates But where is it said When they prove traitors to the Kingdom and are the Devil's Agents they may not be severely punished for it 2. Because those who resist lawful authority and just commands receive to themselves condemnation is not this a non sequitur that the Parliament whose jurisdiction and power is above the King may not call him to an account for tyranny and mis-government 3. Rulers must be obeyed Because they are not a terror to good works but to evil verse 3. is not this a good consequence when they are profest enemies to all good works and do evil and continually evil with both hands that same power which hath set them up cannot take them down again 4. Obey him saith the Apostle why because he is the minister of God to thee for good v. 4. But can this be applied to a tyrant who hath destroy'd the people in body goods doth it not rather plainly imply that those who are the devils ministers to us for evil rather then Gods for good by a lawful power above them should be thrust out of their place 5. It is said ver 5. But if thou dost that which is evil be afrayd for he beareth not the sword in vain for he is the minister of God a revenger to execute wrath on him that doth evil Can any Roialist find any thing here which is not spoken in reference only to faithfull Magistrates in the execution of justice upon malefactors wherein they must not be resisted much lesse punished for well doing And by the rules of contraries a Tyrant that makes war upon his people to ruin spoyl and enslave them protecteth all wicked men gives liberty to all manner of unrighteousnesse bears the sword not only in vain in reference to the publick good but draws it forth only upon those that are good for such cruelty oppression and impiety may lawfully be cut off 3. The text doth include all higher powers not to be restrain'd only to Kings and Emperors but comprehends all kind of civil Rulers Augustin Irenaeus Chrysostom Hierom expound it of Masters Magistrates So doe Calvin Beza Pareus Piscator Rollor Marlorat So do Popish writers Aquinas Lyra Hugo Cardinal Carthus Pierius Toletus Cornel. a Lapide Salmeron Estitius expound the place Hence it must follow that no resistance of the higher powers is here prohibited but only in the due and legall execution of their offices For no man will deny but inferior lawfull officers illegally endeavoring to subvert Liberties Laws and unrighteously governing the people may be imprisoned arraigned and condemned for their misdemeanor And this granted which cannot be denyed our conclusion is fully proved and thus I make it appear Whosoever is a murderer or a traytor to the State may lawfully be put to death by the civil power that is above him and that by vertue of this text Rom. 13.1,2,3 But the King of England is under a civil power and jurisdiction to wit the Soveraign power of the Parliament Ergo If a murderer or traitor to the State may lawfully be put to death Though there be no Tribunall saith Mr. Rutherfurd formally regall and Kingly above the King yet there is a Tribunal vertual eminently above him in the case of tyranny for the States and Princes are above him 4. That the Romane Emperor when Paul wrote was the Supream and highest power in the Romane State is most untrue Iustinian indeed speaks somewhat that way Dig. l 2. Tit 2. p 146. that the Emperor was absolute but he is partial in this case Bodin proveth Bodin de Rep l 2 c. 5. pag. 221. That the Romane Emperors were but princes of the Common-wealth and that the Soveraignty remained still in the Senate and people Livius Florus Tacitus say the like and to put it out of all doubt the case of Nero that wicked Emperor is proof sufficient whom the Senate judicially condemned and as a publick enemy to the State adjudged him to have his head fastned to a fork and so to be publickly whipt to death and then to be precipitated from a rock upon which sentence he being sought for and forsaken of al to avoyd the execution therof murdered himself with a poinyard 5. As for tyrants and wicked oppressing Magistrates they are not within the intendment of this text neither is there any thing here spoken to prohibit the people from censuring and punishing of them for 1. That which is not the Ordinance of God but rather of the devil and the meer sin and enormity of the Governor himself not of the Government is not within the compasse of this text 2. That which is no point of the Magistrates lawfull power ordained of God but diametrally repugnant to it as tyranny oppression violence c. is not within the verge or compasse of this text 3. All Powers intended in the text are not only ordained of God but also circumscribed and bounded with certain rules of Law justice and honesty within which they must contain themselves and if they passe beyond those limits they are none of Gods Ordinance Now the tyranny and oppression of Kings and Rulers are meer exorbitances arbitrary illegall actions exceeding the bound of justice and honesty prescribed by the Law

the Kings of England have not been absolute Monarchs but the Supreame Soveraignty resided in the people is a thing certainly known and so abundantly proved by other hands as there cannot be any shew of reason brought against it 3. Seeing the King is under law and the representative of the people above the King to proceed in iustice against him hence it will necessarily follow that the King by law may lawfully be put to death for the law saith the highest or supreamest Judge upon earth cannot pardon and free the guilty of the punishment due to him A. de le l. non ideo minns Rom. 3,4 Deu. 1.17 And the reason is he is but the minister of God a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil And if the judgment be the Lords not mans not the Parliaments as indeed it is not he cannot then draw the sword against the innocent nor absolve the guilty except the would take upon him to be wiser then God respect persons in judgment and dispose of that which is proper to his master Now sure it is God only univocally and essentially as God is judge and God only and essentially and all men in relation to him are ministers legates deputies servants I say in relation to him equivocally and improperly Judges and meer created and breathing shadows of the power of the King of Kings And look as the Scribe following his own devise and writing what sentence he pleaseth is not an officer of the court in that point nor the pen and servant of the Judge so the Supream Councel of State and Representative of the Kingdom arraigning the King for murder Treason and other high misdemeanors would be but forged intruders and bastard Judges and go contrary to Law so far as they gieve not the very sentence of God and are not the very mouth of the Iudge of Heaven and Earth to pronounce such a sentence as the Almighty himself would do if he were sitting on the throne or bench 4. Howsoever there be some solemnities of the Law from which the King may be free which indeed are not Laws as Prickman proveth D. c. n. 78 but some circumstances belonging to the Laws Nevertheles if a king commit murder adultery theft and be a traitor a waster and destroyer of his people their goods lives Laws Liberties contrary to his oath and Coronation-Covenant in this case I confidently affirm there is no law that hath reason equity or justice for its bottom and ground against the putting of such a King to death by the great Councel of State as we have formerly shewed above him And the reason is cleer for the people have no power to make a law that the King shall not dy by the hand of Justice what wickednesse soever he should commit 5. I would gladly be informed by any Iurist or Statist If a Tyrant without a title may be killed yea by a private man why a Tyrant that hath lost his right and title to the Crown by the highest Judicature in the Kingdom may not lawfully be put to death Ut L. vim F de Justit jure ubi plene per omnes For the first the law gives it and it is so generally held by Vasquez Barclay and others Vasq l. 1 c. 8. n. 33. Bar. cont Monar l. 4 cap. 10 pag. 286. And for the latter observe what Royalists themselues acknowledge Winzetus against Buchan saith of Nero Wintzet adv Buc. p. 275. that he seeking to destroy the Senate and People of Rome and seeking to make new lawes for himself excidit jure Regni lost all right to the kingdom And Barclay saith a Tyrant such as Caligula spoliare se jure Regni spoileth himself of the right to the Crown So Grotius Groti de jure bell pac l. 1 cap. 4. Si Rex hostili animo in totius populi exitium feratur emittit regnum If he turn enemy to the kingdom for their destruction he loseth his kingdom because saith he Voluntas imperandi voluntas perdendi simul consistere non possunt A wil or mind to govern and to destroy cannot consist together in one 6 The cutting off of a contagious member that by a Gangreen would corrupt the whole body is wel warranted by nature and reason for the safety of the whole is to be preferred before a part But here perhaps it will be objected cut off a mans head and the life of the body is taken away so the King being the head destroy him and the whole body of the Common-wealth is dissolved I answer God cutteth off the spirits of Tyrannous Kings and yet the Common-wealth is not dissolved For 1. This or that tyrannous King being a transient mortal thing cannot be referred to the immortal Common-wealth as it is adequate correlate 2. If all the Kings of the earth were removed yet the Common-wealth would not leave off to be a body it would be only a casting off of one form of Government for another the worser for the better but the natural body without the head cannot live Lastly Mr. Pryn citing some Law-Books where the King is said to be the only Supream Governor of this Realm hath no Peer in his Kingdom ought not to be under man Soveraign power of Parl l. 1. p 104 105. Thus answereth 1. That the meaning of al these books is the king is above every one of his Subjects particularly distributively as single men but if we take them collectively in Parliament as they are one body and represent the whole kingdom then they are above the King and may yea ought to restrain and question his actions his male-Administrations if there be just cause 2. Bracton explains himself how he is highest and without a Peer to wit in distributing justice that is he is the highest Iusticiar in the Kingdom but as the Law as any in receiving justice And for the Oath of Supremacy it relates to the Popes forraign Princes authority formerly usurped in this Realm and not at all to be referred to Parliaments or their jurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority not so much as once thought of by the subscribers of this Oath which had its creation and authority from the Parliament 15. Obje Some say For people to adjudge their King to death is without example either in Scripture or humane history Answ 1. We argue this negatively this is neither commanded nor practised nor warranted by promise Ergo. It is not lawfull But this is not practised in Scripture Ergo. It is not lawfull It followeth not I read not in all the word of God of a man put to death for lying with a beast for witchcraft for tempting the people to go a whoring and serving a false God yet these things are written and are all divine precepts 2. Physitians say that that Physick which only stirs the humors and doth not carry them away leaves the body worse then it found it so

it hath been seen by often and wofull experience when the States of a kingdom have only stirr'd their Princes by opposing and resisting their tyranny and misgovernment and not cut them off they have brought upon themselves and the whol Realm the more mischief and misery afterward 3. Former examples are no binding rules to us otherwise then we see men have acted according to reason religion Law for wherein soever they differed from these things therein ought we to differ from them 4. If kings formerly have not judicially been put to death for murder treason and other capital crimes it is the more needfull and usefull that such a thing should now be don that all other Nations far and neer may hence know and learn what their duty is and what they may lawfully do in point of Law and conscience and not stand stil as if they were beasts in a base and sencelesse slavery any longer But Fiftly To speak more directly to the objection There is no new thing under the sun We have many examples of Emperours Kings which have judicially been condemned put to death by the Soveraign power of the people Matth. Par. pag. 273 274 275. Not to speak of Nero mentioned before nor of our King John who was condemned to death by a Parliament in France for slaying his Nephew Arthur treacherously with his own hands and likewise to lose the Crown of England It is said of Amaziah king of Iudah 2 King 14.19 That they made a conspiracie against him in Jerusalem and he fled to Lachish but they sent after him to Lachish and slew him there Not privately but openly as acted by publick authority for his great impiety and having broken his Oath and Covenant whereupon we reade not of any complaint inquisition proceeding or punishment inflicted on those that slew him after his death either by the people or his children as there was upon those that slew king Amon but being slain They to wit the persons who had put him to death brought him on horses and he was buried in Jerusalem and all the people of Judah made Ahaziah King Which plainly shews that what was formerly done by the greater part of the State at Jerusalem was afterward confirmed by Common-consent and executed by command of those which might lawfully do it In like manner Andronieus was apprehended deposed put to death by the people for his tyranny and oppression Nic. Chr An nales fol. 52. Grimst Emp. hlst pag. 160. Reg. Sco Buchan lib. 4. pa. 111. So Iulianus not only deprived of the Empire but authoritatively commanded to be slain in his pallace Heliogabulus that monster of mankind was by the Praetorian Soldiers put to death with the Senate and peoples approbation Dardan King of Scotland by the unanimous consent of the Nobles and people had his head cut off which they carried about for a laughing-stock and threw his corps into a jakes after he had reigned 4. years Lucktock the 22 King of Scotland for his vitious and base life was convented before an assembly of the chief men and slain with the instruments of his wickedness ib. p. 113. Eugenius the 8. another of their Kings was for his filthy lusts covetousness and cruelty slain in the assembly of his Lords by their general consent and his companions in villany and wickednesse hanged Et ipsi gratum populo speculatum praebuere pag. 165. which was a greateful spectacle to the people So Agis and Pausanias two Lacedemonian Princes put to death by the people Mun. cos l. 5. c. 37. p. 1248. So the Thracian Kings for their offences by publick consent were punished with death The usual practice of the Saboeans was to stone their Kings if they highly transgressed and went beyond their bounds If need were it might be shewed out of Histories and approved Authors that the Athenians Ionians Melesians Marchomanni Quadi Persians Sicilians Corinthians Parthians Meroes Gardii Medes Paphii Cathians Ethiopians Sidonians Germanes Swedes Danes and antiently even all other Nations not only prescribed laws and lim●… to their Kings but cald them usually to an account for their misgovernment and oft times put them to death when they saw cause Alex. ab ●… 4. ●… fol. ●… ●uel Gibel pli l. 4. Alex. l. 6. c. 4. Plut. in Arat. Val. 6 The putting to death of Tyrants in former times hath been held so lawful and honorable as large rewards have been propounded to the undertakers and authors thereof and to the living they have given the goods of the Tyrant as to the deliverer of their Country and honored the dead with Epitaphs and Statutes of brasse as in Athens Harmodius and Aristogiton together with Brutus and Cassius Max. l. 2. c. ult L. 3. L. om● ne delictū Sect. ut F. de re mil. in Greece Aratus the Sycienian and thus by publick Decree of their States because they had freed their several countries from the tyranny of Pasistratus Coesar Nicoebis yea those monuments of Tyrant-killers by antiquity were so honored and highly esteemed of as they placed them in their Temples on sacred banqueting beds And when Xerxes having vanquished the Athenians had carried away with him the Statutes of Harmodius and Aristogiton into his own country Seleucus one of the successors of Alexander the great King of Syria caused them with all diligence to be carried back again and to be set up in their own places In Norway antiently they had this custom That whosoever slew a Tyrant King was thereby made a King Gul. Neu brig l. 3. cap. 6. And what the Poet wrote was the opinion then and common saying of the people Victima haud ulla amplior Potest magisve opima mactari Iovi Quam Rex iniquus To God no better offering can men bring Nor fatter than a wicked Tyrant King For conclusion This only I shall add to say There is not an example any where of the like practice If it be meant not so judicially and according to the strict rule and form of law I confesse there may be much truth in it For commonly heretofore amongst all Nations Iewes Turks Papists Heathens c. People observed not the manner as matter they thought Tyrants so worthy of death as they did not much mind how and in what way to cut them off so they were destroyed hence it came to passe that few tyrannous princes in old time ever died a natural death but either by their subjects or their means were slain in warre or by some private hand made out of the way which gave Iuvenal occasion to say Ad generum Cereris sine caede sanguine pauci Descendunt Reges sicca morte Tyranni Few Tyrants unto Plutoes Court do go But that are thither sent by bloody blow And therefore this late proceeding against the King seeing it was so legal it shall live and remain upon record to the perpetual honor of our English State who took no dark or doubtful way no indirect ●…by-course but went in the open and plain path of Justice Reason ●…w and Religion and in this regard they need not fear the reproaches and falshood of malitious tongues and pens for as God doth approve their work and owns it so he will defend them his and their Cause in spight of all treacherous and wicked Designs either of Men or Devils The end of the First Part.