Selected quad for the lemma: country_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
country_n	great_a	king_n	scot_n	1,813	5	9.2331	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86280	Certamen epistolare, or, The letter-combate. Managed by Peter Heylyn, D.D. with 1. Mr. Baxter of Kederminster. 2. Dr. Barnard of Grays-Inne. 3. Mr. Hickman of Mag. C. Oxon. And 4. J.H. of the city of Westminster Esq; With 5. An appendix to the same, in answer to some passages in Mr. Fullers late Appeal.	Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.; Bernard, Nicholas, d. 1661.; Hickman, Henry, d. 1692.; Harrington, James, 1611-1677.	1659 (1659)	Wing H1687; Thomason E1722_1; ESTC R202410	239,292	425

who on the rooting out of the Hereticks should possess the same to the end that he might keep it in the holy Faith But this was with a salvojure a preservation of the Rights and Interests of the Lords in chief if they gave no hindrance to the work And with this clause that it should after be extended to those also which had no Lord Paramount superiour to them According unto which decree the Albigenses and their Patrons were warred on by the Kings of France till both sides were wearied with the War and compounded it at last upon these conditions viz. That Alphonso younger brother to King Lewis the 9. of France should marry Joan daughter and heir to the last Raimond and have with her the full possession of the Country after his decease provided also that if the said parties died without issue the whole estate should be escheated to the Crown as in fine it did An. 1270. 39. This the occasion of the Canon and this the meaning and the consequent of it but what makes this to the Deposing of Kings and such supreme Princes as have no Lord Paramount above them For if you mean such inferiour Princes as had Lords in chief your argument was not home to the point it aimed at If you alledge that Emperours and Kings as well as such inferiour Princes are hooked in the last clause of viz eadem nihilominus lege servata circa eos qui dominos non habent principales I answer with the learned Bishop of Rochester in his book De Potestate Papae ● 1. c. 8. clausulam istam à Parasito al quo Pontificiae tyrannidis ministro assutam esse that it was patched unto the end of the decree by some Parasite or other Minister of the See of Rome And this he proves by several reasons as namely that Christian Kings and Emperours are n●● of such low esteem as to be comprehended in those general words qui dominos non habent principales without being specially designed and distinguished by their soveraign Titles Secondly that if any such thing had been intended it is not likely that the Embassadors of such Kings and Emperors who were then present in that Councel would ever have consented to it but rather have protested against it and caused their Protestation to be registred in the Acts thereof in due form of Law Thirdly In one of their Rescripts of the said Pope Innocent by whom this Councel was confirmed in which ●e doth plainly declare That when inferiour persons are named or pointed at in any of his Commissions majores digniores sub generali clausula non intelligantur includi that is to say that persons of more eminent rank are not to be understood as comprehended in such general clauses Adde hereunto that in the manner of the proceeding prescribed by this Canon such temporal Lords as shall neglect to purge their Countries of the filth of Heresies were to be excommunicated by the Metropolitan and other Bishops of that Province per Metropolitanum ceteros com provinciales Episcopos as the Canon hath it before the Pope could take any cognizance of the cause And I conceive that no man of reason can imagine that the Metropolitane and Provincial Bishops could or durst exercise any such jurisdiction upon those Christian Kings and Emperours under whom they lived I grant indeed that some of the more turbulent Popes did actually excommunicate and as much as in them lay depose some Christian Kings and Emperors sometimes by arming their own Subjects against them and sometimes giving their Estates and Kingdomes to the next Invador But this makes nothing to your purpose most of those turbulencies being acted before the sitting of this Councel none of them by authority from any Councel at all but carried on by them ex plenitudine potestatis under pretence of that unlimited power which they had arrogated to themselves over all the world and exercised too frequently in these Western parts 40. Such is the Argument by which you justifie M. Burton in his first position viz. That the Popish Religion is Rebellion and may it not be proved by the very same argument that the Calvinian Religion is Rebellion also Calvin himself hath told us in the closes of his Institutions that the 3 Estates in every Kingdome Pareus in his Comment on Rom 13. that the inferiour Magistrates and Buchannan in his book Dejure Regni that the people have a power to curb and controll their Kings and in some cases as in that of Male-administration to depose him also which is much as any of the Popes Parasites have ascribed unto him If you object that these are only private persons and speak their own opinions not the sense of the Churches I hope you will not say that Calvin is a private person who sate as Pope over the Churches of his platform whose writings have been made the Rule and Canon by which all men were to frame their judgments and whose authority in this very point hath been made use of for the justifying of Rebellious actions For when the Scots Commissioners were commanded by Queen Elizabeth to give a reason of their proceedings against their Queen whom not long before they had deposed from the Regal Throne they justified themselves by the authority of Calvin whereby they endeavoured to prove as my Author hath it That the Popular Magistrates are appointed and made to moderate and keep in order the excesse and unrulinesse of Kings and that it was lawful for them to put the Kings that be evil and wicked into prison and also to deprive them of their kingdoms Such instances as this we may find too many enough to prove that none of the three above mentioned though the two last were private persons delivered their own opinions only but the sense of the party The Revolt of the Low-Countries from the King of Spain the man●old embroilments made by the Hugonots in France the withholding of the Town Embden from its natural Lord the Count of Friesland the commotions in Brandenburg the falling off of the Bohemians from the house of Austria the translating of the Crown of Sweden from Sigismond K. of Poland to Charles Duke of Suderman the father of the great Gustavus the Armies thrice raised by the Scots against King Charls and the most unnatural warrs in England with the sad consequents thereof by whom were they contrived and acted but by those of the Calvinian Faction and the predominancy which they have or at the least aspired unto in their several Countries The Genevians having lead the dance in expelling their Bishop whom they acknowledged also for their temporal Prince the daughter Churches thought themselves obliged to follow their dear Mother Church in that particular and many other points of Doctrine sic instituere majores posteri imitantur as we read in Tacitus 41. But against this blow you have a Buckler and tell me that if any Protestant Writer should teach the same that

them and one that hated the Idolatries and superstitions of the Church of Rome with a perfect hatred This Reverend Father must not be consulted in the business for fear it might be thought that it was not to be done without him A Parish Vestry must be called by which M. Sherfield is inabled to take down the offensive Pictures and put new white Glass in the place though he be transported with a fit of unruly zeal instead of taking it down breaks it all in pieces Here then we have an Eldership erected under the Bishops nose a Reformation undertaken by an Act of the Vestry in contempt of those whom God and his Majesty and the Laws had made the sole Judges in the case An example of too sad a consequence to escape unpunished and such as might have put the people upon such a Gog as would have le●t but little work to the late Long Parliament Non ibi consistent Exemplaubi ceperunt sed in tenuem recepta tramitem latissime evagandi sibi viam faciunt as my Author hath it 52. But he proceeds according to his usual way of asking Questions and would fain know in what respect they may be accounted the obedient Sons of the Church who study by all their learning to take off that ignominous name of Antichrist from the Pope of Rome which had bin fastned on him by King James Archbishop Whitgift Bishop Andrews and the late Lord Primate and finally by the whole Clergy in their Convocation An. 1605. In the recital of which Proof I find not that the name of Antichrist was ever positively and and in terminis ascribed unto the Popes of Rome by any Article Homily Canon or injunction or by any other publick Monument of the Church of England which leave it to the Liberty of every man to conceive therein according as he is satisfied in his own mind and convinced in his understanding Arch-bishop Whitgift the Primate Bishop Andrews conceived the Pope to be Antichrist and did write accordingly Archbishop Laud and Bishop Mountague were otherwise perswaded in it and were not willing to exasperate those of the Popish Party by such an unnecessary provocation yet this must be accounted amongst their crimes For aggravating whereof he telleth us that the Pope was proved to be Antichrist by the Pen of King James which is more then he can prove that said it K. James used many Arguments for the proof thereof but whether they proved the point or not may be made a question Assuredly the King himself is to be looked on as the fittest Judge of his own intentions performance And he declared to the Prince at his going to Spain that he writ not that discourse concludingly but by way of Argument to the end that the Pope and his Adherents might see there was as good Arguments to prove him Antichrist as for the Pope to challenge any temporal Jurisdiction over Kings and Princes This your Antagonist might have seen in his own Canterburies doom fol. 264. Out of which Book he makes his other Argument also which proves the name of Antichrist to be ascribed unto the Pope by the Church of England because the Lords spiritual in the upper house and the whole Convocation in the Act of the subsidy 3. Jacobi so refined ●● If so If any such Definition passed in the Convocation it is no matter what was done by the Lords Spiritual in the upper House of Parliament for that I take to be his meaning as signifying nothing to the purpose Wherein Gods name may such an unstudied man as I find that definition not in the Acts of Convocation I am sure of that and where there was no such point debated and agreed upon all that occurs is to bee found onely in the preamble to the Grant of Subsidies made at a time when the Prelates and Clergy were amazed at the horror of that Divellish plot for blowing up the Parliament Houses with the King Prelates Peers Judges and the choicest Gentry of the Nation by the fury of Gun-powder But were the man acquainted amongst Civilians they would tell him that they have a Maxime to this Effect that Apices juris nihil ponuns The Titles and preambles to Laws are no definitions and neither bind the subject in his purse or Pater-noster 53. As for the rest of the Bishops I find two of them charged particularly and the rest in General Mountague charged from D. Prideaux to be merus Grammatius and Linsel charged from M. Smart to have spoken reproachfully of the first Reformers on the Book of Homilies But as Mountague was too great a Scholar to be put to School to D. Prideaux in any point of Learning of what kind soever so Linsol was a Man of too much sobriety to use those rash and unadvised speeches which he stands accused of And as for Mr. Smart the apology of D. Cosens speaks him so sufficiently that I may very wel save myself the labour of a Repetition More generally he tells us from a speech of the late Lord Faulkland that some of the Bishops and their adherents have destroyed unity under pretence of uniformity have brought in superstition and scandal under the title of Reverence and decency and have defiled our Churches by adoring our Churches c. p. 40. and not long after p 64. That they have so industriously laboured to deduce themselves from Rome that they have given great suspition that in Gratitude they desire to return thither or at least to meet it half way Some have evidently laboured to bring in an English though not a Romish Papacy not the out side and dress of it onely but equally absolute a blind dependence of the People on the Clergy and of the Clergy on themselves and have opposed Papacy beyond the Sea that they might settle one beyond the water But these are onely the evaporations of some discontents which that noble Orator had contracted He had been at great charges in accommodating himself with necessaries for waiting on his Majesty in his first expedition against the Scots in hope of doing service to his King and Country and gaining honour to himself dismist upon the Pacifiation as most of the English Adventurers without thanks of honour where he made himself more sensible of the neglect which he conceived he suffered under then possibly might consist with those many favours which both Kings had shewed unto his Father But no sooner had that noble soul dispers'd those clouds of discontent which before obscured it but he brake out again in his natural splendor and show'd himself as zealous an advocate for the Episcopal order as any other in that house witness this passage in a speech of his not long before the dismissing of the Scottish Army Anno 1641. viz. The Ground of this Government by Episcopacy is so ancient and so general so uncontradicted in the first and best times that our most laborious antiquaries can find no Nation no City no Church no Houses

though moving in an higher sphere should neither give the light nor impart such influences to the world as the two Great Luminaries such as you fancy the Estates in a Gothick Moddel in case he prove not rather a falling Star as perhaps he may But hoping you will pardon this irruption in me I proceed unto the second part of your Letter in which I am said to speak rather like a Divine then a Polititian And yet not like a Divine neither but like a Divine as I suppose and no more then so 17. But letting all things be as they may you tell me that I aske of Calvin in what part of the word of God we may finde any such Authority given to popular Magistrates as he tells us of And for an answer hereunto you prepare the way by laying down the constitution of the Government of the people of Israel which you affirm to have been founded on a popular ballance And were it so there is no question to be made but that a popular ballance even by the Ordinance of God himself in Scripture both did and may amount to Empire for who ●rt thou O man which disputest with God or callest in question any of the Divine Acts of that heavenly providence The Question will be onely this Whether the Government of the Israelites was founded in a popular ballance which you say it was and I think rather that it was not The reason why I think so I shall show anon and in the mean time I will look upon the Argument which you suppose it to be proved We find say you the people of Israel iudging the tribe of Benjamine and by the Oracle of God leavying War against them Which being an act of soveraign power declares that Government to be founded on a popular ballance But first it appears not by the text that all the people of Israel did sit as Judges on the tribe of Benjamine the judgement might be passed for what you can say to the contrary by the Elders onely that is to say the heads or chiefs of the several families of the tribes of Israel and nothing but the execution of the sentences by them committed to the people Secondly It appears not by the Text that the War was leavied against the Benjamites by any Oracle of God but the contrary rather For it is said that the children of Israel were gathered tother as one man at a place called Mizpeh that they resolved upon the War and concluded how to have it carried before they asked Councel of the Lord Judg. 20. 18. And when they asked councel of the Lord it was not whether they should proceed in the War or not that being a thing resolved before hand but which of the tribes should go up first to the battail again the children of Benjamin as in the Book of Judges Cap 20. 18. which probably might be the cause of their ill success in the first encounter as having engaged themselves in a bloody War against their brethren before they sought for councel at the Oracle of God as they should have done And therefore Thirdly this rather showes the people of Israel to be under no Government at all then to be governed by a Democratical or popular form and serves as a most excellent commentary on the last words of the book of Judges viz In those dayes there was no King in Israel every Man did that which was right in his own eyes Had it been under any one form of Government Popular or Democratical call it what you will every man durst not to have done that which is right in his own eyes though there had been at that time no King in Israel And as they were not under any popular Government by which they might have been restrained from doing what was right in their own eyes so you confess that they were not at that time under the Government of the Sanhedrim for speaking of that passage in the first of Judges where Judah said unto Simeon 〈◊〉 Brother come up with me into my lot that we may fight against the Canaanites and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot so Simeon went with him c. you thereupon infer that by this leaguing at their pleasure one with another it was plain the Sanhedrim their common Ligament was broken so that the Sanhedrim being broken the Kings not instituted nor any form of popular Government set up among them by common consent nothing remains but that they must be governed by the Heads or Chiefs of the several Families into which the Tribes were Generally divided in those times Had there been any such Councel or establisht body as that of the Generall Estates of the united Provinces or that of the Cantons and their Confederates amongst the Switzers they might have been said to have been under such a popular Government as those people are though every Tribe had a distinct Government of its own as those Provinces and Cantons have 18. And here I should proceed to the Examination of that part of your Letter which concerns the Sanhedrim as being the point of greatest difference between us in the present business But considering that you have spent so much of your Paper about the Original institution and authority of the Kings of Israel and consequently of all those who have enjoyed that power and dignity in their severall Countrys I shall first lay all together which you have deliver'd on that subject with my opinion in the same as it comes before me In order whereunto I am first to say that the Government of that people when they were in Aegypt was under the Heads or Chiefes of their several families who by a paternal right derived on them from their first Father Adam challenged and enjoy'd a Fatherly authority over all those who descended of them And unto these did Moses address himselfe when he was to communicate from the Lord that most joyful news of their deliverance out of Aegypt called by the name of Elders in the Book of Exodus 3. 16. 4. 29 not called so onely because they were in honour onely amongst the rest of the people as you seem to say but because they were above them also in this point of power The people else had had no remedy in any differences and debates which might rise amongst them but suing in the Courts of Aegypt which it was as unfit for them to do as it was amongst the Primitive Christians to go to Law with one another in Emergent differences and that before the unbelievers But this dispersed authority being united in the person of Moses as many lines united in one Center from a large circumference the whole Government of the people did remain in him till by the advice of Jethro they were divided and sub divided into several Companies Each of them having over him their appointed Rulers By Gods appointment afterwards a standing Court of 70. Elders which they called the Sanhedrim were chosen to

bear part of the publick Government but whether chosen out of the Jethronian Judges or not we shall see anon Moses being dead and Josuah who succeeded in the supream Authority being also gathered by his Fathers the authority of the Sanhedrim dying also with them as your self confesseth the Ordinary Government returned again to the heads of the several Families as before in Aegypt the extraordinary being vested in those several Judges whom God raised up from time to time to free them from the power of those cruel Enemies from whose Tyranny they were not able otherwise to have freed themselves And in this state they stood till the time of Samuel when being vexed by the Philistines with con●inual Wars the Ark of God was taken not long before and their condition no less miserable under the times of Samuel then it was at the worst they desire to have a King to fight their Battails and to go in and out before them like to other Nations And that their future King might settle on the surer foundation he had not only the approbation of the Lord 1 Sam. 8. 22. and the acclamations of the people chap 10. v. 24. but the Heads and Chief● of the several Families devolved their whole power upon him the motion being made to Samuel by the Elders of the people aswell in their own names as in the names of all the rest of the Tribes as appears 1 Sam. 8. 4. 19. Before this time that is to say after the deaths of Moses and Joshua who were Kings in fact though not in title the Israelites had no King to Raign over them but the Lord himself from whom they first received their Laws from whose mouth they received direction in all cases of difficulty and from whose hands they received protection in all times of danger And when they had any visible Judge or supream Governour God did not only raign in their persons in regard of that immediate vocation which they had from him but also of the gifts of the Spirit and the co-operation of his Grace and Power In which respect the Government of the Israelites during that interval of time is called by many learned Writers by the name of Theocratie or the immediate Government of the Lord himself And this the Lord himself not obscurely intimates when he said to Samuel They have not rejected thee but they have rejected me ne regnem super eos that I should not raign over them I know the general stream of Writers do understand these words as words of dislike and indignation in that the people seemed to be weary of his Government in their desire of having a King like to other Nations but I conceive with all due reverence unto those who opine the contrary that God spake these words rather to comfort Samuel whom he found much displeased and troubled at the Proposition of the Elders as if a greater injury had been offered to himself then was done to the Prophet then out of any dislike which he had of the matter For if he had disliked the matter that is that they should have a King like other Nations he neither would have fore signified it as a blessing on the seed of Abraham Gen. 17. or as prerogative of Judah Gen. 49. nor have foretold the people that when they should desire a King they should set him to be King over them whom the Lord their God shall chuse Deut. 17. nor would he have commanded Samuel to give them a King as they desired nor have directed him particularly to that very man whom he had designed for the Kingdom But on the contrary say you we find it otherwise in the Prophet Hosea where the Lord said unto the people That he had given them a King in his anger that is as you affirm in Saul and that he took him away in his wrath that is say you in the Captivity Hos. 13. 11. And to this purpose you alledge another passage in the same Prophet ch 8. v. 4. where it is said They have set up Kings and not by me they have made Princes and I knew it not But for all this your explication of the one Text and your application of the other are alike erroneous The Prophet Hosea lived in the time of Jerohoam son of Joah King of Israel and directed the words of his Prophesy to the people chiefly as they were separated and abstracted from the Realm of Israel And first beginning with the last it appears plainly by the verse foregoing that the words by you cited are addressed particularly to the house of Israel and it had been hard dealing in the Prophet to charge the ten Tribes with setting up of Kings but not by him had it been so understood of Saul as you say it was when it was the fault if it were a fault of all the twelve and therefore saith S. Hierome Potest hoc quod dicit ipsi regnaverunt non c. Etiam de Jeroboham acc●pi filio Nabath de ceteris principibus qui ei in imperio successerint More positively some learned Writers in the Church of Rome by whom it is affirmed Hun● locum pertinere ad Reges Israel quorum primus erat Jeroboham qui tempore Reaboham filii Salamonis Regnum decem Tribuum invasit And to the same effect saith Deodati amongst the Protestants viz. The people of their own proper motion without enquiring after Gods will or staying for his command or permission have chosen and made Kings of their own heads separating themselves from the lawful Rule of David ' s posterity 1 King 11. 31. And then the meaning of the other Text will be plainly this I gave thee or I gave thee leave to have a King in mine anger that is to say in Jeroboham the Son of Nebat who by with-drawing the people from the worship of God to worship the golden Calves of Dan and Bethel is said to have made Israel sin and thereby plagued them irremediously without repentance into the heavy anger and displeasure of the Lord their God And I took him away in my wrath that is to say in the person of Hosheah the last King of Israel carried away captive together with the greatest part of his people into the land of Assyria the people being dispersed in the several Provinces of that Empire never returning since that time to their native Country nor having any King of their own to raign over them as afore they had Not to say any thing of many of the Kings of Israel treacherously slain by their own subjects out of an ambitious desire to obtain the Kingdom of whom it may be justly said That God took them away in his wrath before they had lived out their full time in the course of nature Nothing in these two Texts which relates to Saul and the captivity that is to say the Captivity of Babylon as you understand it Such is your play with holy Scripture when you speak as you

suppose like a Divine 20. But you have another use to make of the Prophet Hosea whose words you cite unto a purpose that he never meant namely to prove that Kings are not of Divine Right For having said that such Divines who will alwaies have Kings to be of divine right are not to be hearkned too seeing they affirm that which is clean contrary to Scripture you add that in this case said Hosea they have set up Kings and not by me they have made Princes and I knew it not But first these words are not spoken by the Prophet touching the institution of Kings in General but onely of a particular fact in the ten Tribes of Israel by with drawing themselves from the house of David and setting up a King of their own without consulting with the Lord or craving his approbation and consent in the business Secondly If it may be said that Kings are not of Divine Right and institution because God saith here by the Prophet that some Kings have been set up but not by him you have more reason to affirm that Kings are of Divine Right and institution because he saith in another place less capable of any such misconstruction as you make of this by me Kings reign All Kings are said to reign by God because all reign by his appointment by his permission at the least And yet some Kings may be truly said not to reign by him either because they are set up by the people in a tumultuous and seditious way against the natural Kings and Princes or else because they come unto their Crowns by usurpation blood and violence contrary to his will revealed and the establisht Laws of their severall Countrys Which Argument if it should be good we could not have a stronger against such Papists as hold alwayes for it seems no mater if they did hold so but somtimes that the Pope by Divine right is head of the universall Church then by showing them out of their own Histories how many Popes have raised themselves into that See either by open faction or by secret bribery and by violent and unjust intrusion Of whom it may be said and that not improperly that though they pretend to be Christs Vicars and the successors of St. Peter yet were they never plac't by Christ in St. Peters Chair Now to dispute from the persons to the power and from the unjust wayes of acquiring that power to the original right and institution of it is such a sorry piece of Logick as you blaming those who dispute from the folly of a people against an Ordinance of God For upon what ground else do you lay the foundation of the legall Government especially amongst the Hebrews but on the folly of the people p. 11. the imprudence and importunity of the people p. 14. upon which ground also you build the supream authority of the Judges who onely by the meet folly of the people came to be set up in Israel p. 13. But certainly if their desires to have a King were folly and imprudence in them it must be felix fatuitas a very fortunate imprudence and a succesful folly I am sure of that that people never live in a settled condition till they come to the Government of Kings For was it not by the fortunate conduct of their Kings that they exterminated the rest of the Canaanites broke the Amalekites in pieces and crusht the power of the Phylistins growing by that means formidable unto all their Neigbours Was it not by the power and reputation of their Kings that they gained some strong Towns from the Children of Ammon and enlarged their Territories by the conquest of some parts of Syria that they grew strong in shipping and mannaged a wealthy trade from Esion-Geber in the streights of Babel-Mandel to the Land of Ophir in the remotest parts of India Prosperities sufficient to justifie and endear such burdens as by the alteration of the Government might be said upon them 21. From such Divines in Generall as will always I must keep that word have Kings to be by divine Right you come to me at last in my own particular charging me that at a venture I will have Kings to be of Divine Right and to be absolute whereas in truth say you if Divine Right be derived unto Kings from these of the Hebrews onely it is most apparent that no absolute King can be of Divine Right And first to answer for my self for having sometime been a Parson I shall take leave to Christen my own Child first I think that I was never so rash nor so ill advised as to speak any thing at aventure in so great a point as the originall institution and divine right of Kings Secondly I am sure I have not so little studied the Forms of Government as to affirm any where in that Book against Calvin as you call it that all Kings be absolute The second Sect. of the sixt Chapter of that Book being spent for the most part in shewing the differences between conditional Kings and an absolute Monarch And Thirdly They must be as sorry Divines and as bad Historians as my self who ascribe the absolute Power or the Divine right of Kings to the first institution of a King amongst the Hebrews For who knows not if he know any thing in that kind that there were Kings in Aegypt and Assyria as also of Scycionia in Peleponesus not long after the Flood Kings of the Aborigines and the Trojan race in Italy in that of Athens Argos and Micenae amongst the Greeks of the Parthians Syrians c. in the Greater and of Lydia in the lesser Asia long time before the Raign of Saul the first King of the Hebrews all which were absolute Monarchs in their several Countrys And as once Tully said Nulla gens tam barbara that never Nation was so barbarous but did acknowledge this principle that there was a God so will you hardly find any barbarous Nation who acknowledge not the supream Government of Kings And how then all Nations should agree in giving themselves over to the power and Government of Kings I believe none cannot show me a better reason then that they either did it by the light of natural reason by which they found that Government to be fittest for them or that the first Kings of every Nation were the heads families that retained that paternal right over all such as descended of them as might entitle their authority to divine institution For proof whereof since you have such a prejudice against Divines you need look no farther then your self who tells us p. 12. That Kings no question where the ballance is Monarchical are of Divine right and if they be good the greatest blessing that the Government so standing can be capable of or if you will not stand to this then look on the first Chapter of Aristotles Politicks where he makes the Regall Government to stand upon no other bottom then paternal Authority Initio

hereof he calls the Book it self to witness Offered to and Refused by some Stationers because that by reason of his Hi●h terms they could not make a saving Bargain to themselves fol. 57. For Answer whereunto I must let him know that the Animadversions when they stood single by themselves in the first draught of them were offered to M. Roycro●t the Printer for a peece of Plate of five or six pounds and a quartern of Coppies which would have cost him nothing but so much paper conditioned that he should be bound to make them ready b● Candlemas Term 1657. but he not performing that condition I sent for them again enlarged them to a full third Part and seconded them with the Advertisements on Sandersons Histories and having so done offered them to M. Royston and M Marriot who had undertook the Printing of the Book called Respondit Petrus after my old friend had refused it whose Propositions for I reserved the offer to be made by them being very free and ingenuous were by me cheerfully excepted But M. Marriot afterwards declining the business it was afterwards performed by M. Royston and M. Seyle his said old friend on no better conditions then had been offerred at the first And now I am forced upon this point I shall add this also that for the Obseruations on the Hist of H. L. Esq and the defence thereof against the Observator Observed the Help to History which now I shall boldly take upon me being thus put to it my Commentary on the Creed and the Book called Ecclesia Vindicata I never ma●e any conditions at all and for the four last never received any consideration but in Copies onely and those too in so small a number that I had not above seven or eight of the three first and but twelve of the last And for the Printing of these Papers so far am I from making any Capitulation that it remains wholly in the ingenuity of the Stationer to deal with me in it as he please● so that I scrible for the most part as some Cats kill M●se rather to find my self some Recreation then to satisfie hunger And though I have presented as many of the said Books and my large Cosmographies within seven years past as did amount at the least unto twenty pound I never received the value of a single ●●●thing either directly or indirectly either in money or any other kind of Retribution of what sort soever When my Adversary can say the like let him upbraid me with the Love of Regina Pecunia but till then be silent 14. But he goes on and charges me with addressing my History of St. George by several Letters to the Earls of Danby Lindsey c. And it is fit that he should have an answer to that Charge also And therefore be he pleased to know that when I first came came to the Kings service I was very young a stranger and unpractised in the wayes of the Court and therefore thought it necessary to make my self known to the Great Lords about his Majesty by writing that History having presented it to three or four of the Lords which were of the Order of the Garter the Earl of Rutland would needs force upon me the taking of two twenty shilling peeces in Gold The sence and shame whereof did so discompose me that afterwards I never gave any one of them with my own hands but onely to the Earl of Sommerset whom I had a great desire to see and from whose condition I could promise my self to come off with freedom But afterwards addressed them with several Leters by some one or other of my servants with whom I hope my Adversary will not think that I parted stakes as many Country Madams are affirmed to do in the Butlers Box. And though I dedicated two of my Books since his Majesties death to two great Peers of this Realm yet for avoiding all such sinister interpretations which otherwise might have b●●n made I sent the one of them with a Letter into Wiltshire and another unto High-Gate by one of my Sons not above 15 years of age receiving from the one a civil acknowledgment in curteous language but from the other not so much as a verbal thanks And give me leave to add this also that I have found more civility in this Kind from a Noble Lady of Hertfordshire whom I never saw and unto whom I never made the least application of this nature then from all persons of both Sexes that ever I addrest my self unto since this scribling humour seised upon me I thank God I never was reduced to such a necessity as to make the writing of Books any part of the trade which I was to live by for if I had I should have found from it such an hungry subsistence as would not have given a chick its breakfast when first out of the shell If the great Queen Regina Pecunia had not been better courted by some of our late Scripturients then she hath hitherto been by me they might have put up all their gettings into a Sempsters Thimble and not filled it neither 15. These Charges being thus blown aside I must be told of many Errors in my Cosmography and the brief view of the Raign of King Charles not long since published the not discovering whereof my Adversary imputes unto himself for a work of merit In reference to the fi●st I must needs confess that in the last Edition of my Cosmography there are many Errors but they are rather Errors of the Press then of the Pen. And the Appeallant cannot chuse but know since he pretends to have read that Book that I complain more then once or twice for want of true intelligence in the discribing of some remote Countrys and India amongst the rest which were but little known to Ancient Writers and have been so imperfectly discribed by our modern Travellors that no certainty in History or Chorography can be gathered from them If any person shall be pleased to improve my knowledge and certifie me of the Errors which I have committed I shall not spurn against him as the Appeallant doth at me but thankfully acknowledge their humanity in it and cheerfully reform what is found amiss In the composing of this Book he is pleased to tell me that the extravagancies by me committed are as great as his that 16. parts thereof in 20. are meerly Historical alien from the subject in the strictne●s thereof The Ped●grees of so many Princes not being reducible to the subject which I have in hand fol. 37. But if he h●d been please● to consult the Title he might have found that the History of the whole world and all the principal Kingdoms Seas and Iles thereof is as much promised in that Book as the Chorography or Topical Discription of the severall places and therefore nei●her Alien Extrinsecal or Extravagant to my first design And whereas he is pleased to tell us a merry tale of a Gentleman who bespoke a