equally follows the people ought not to account that a profit or strength to them which is a losse and wasting to the King nor ought they to think that perisht to them which is gained to him Regall dignity was erected to preserve the commonalty It was so for out of the sense of those miseries which the want of due administration of justice produced routs became societies and placed a head over them to whom they paid the tribute of reverence for the benefit of Protection But that which is the end is farre more honourable and valuable in nature and policy then that which is the meanes The conclusion implied is therefore the Commons more honourable then the Soveraign J will frame some other arguments upon the same principle see how he approves them Angels are ministring spirits for the good of men but the end more honourable and valuable then the meanes therefore men more honourable then Angels Once more in a closer paralel Christ is made the head of the Church for the salvation of man but that which is the end is far more honourable and valuable c then that which is the meanes therefore man far more honourable and valuable then Christ If any should think these instances doe not fully conclude because the highest end of Angels ministration and the obedience of Christ is the glory of God he must consider Gods glory is the supream end of government also And therefore this being common to both cannot difference the case Though we grant the good of the people is more valuable he cannot hence infer a greater worthinesse or more power to be in them though the safety of patients is most to be regarded yet the Physitian is much better qualified to effect that end Marriage was ordained for the lawfull procreation of children that is honourable amongst all men we doe not read this is so The rule doth hold in such meanes as are only valuable by that relation they beare unto their ends and have no proper goodnes of their owne But a King is not so to his people if we looke back unto his first extraction when he was taken from among the people to be set over them we must needs behold him even then as a man of some worth honour and eminency which the superaddition of Royalty did not destroy but encrease To be a meanes of his peoples preservation is very consistent with the height of honour The case is not unlike in the noblest professors the Divine the Lawyer the Physition compared to their severall charges they the meanes these the ends shall we from thence conclude the poore client a better man then his learned counsell or the simple patient then his Doctor This directs as to the transcendent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all politiques to the Paramount law that shall give law to all humane lawes whatsoever and that is Salus populi How many nations hath this abused principle brought to ruine and confusion It is unquestionable in the constitution of all Governments this is the prime end as being most agreeable with the joynt interest both of rulers and people It is as much without doubt that after estates established the governours proportion all their lawes to this end for who that is wise will not provide for their safety as well as he can in whose destruction his own is involv'd notwithstanding this the multitude not comprehending the reason which made all people commit themselves their lives and fortunes to the trust of their rulers who were wiser and therefore could better foresee dangers and had the greatest share in the present state and therefore would more carefully endeavour to prevent them readily hearken to crafty men who seeme to pitty their sufferings and tell them they are not so well governed as they might be Thus Absalon stole away the hearts of his Fathers Subjects O that I were made judge in the land 2. Sam. 15.4 that every man which hath any suit or cause might come unto me and I would doe him justice There is little good to be expected from those who will doe wrong that they may have opportunity to do right Such men have great advantage on weake understandings because there is no state wherein it might not be wished that somethings were amended and they presse upon them present inconveniences and frame some new form wherein they promise them they shall be free from all and therefore desire their assistance in bringing this happy change about The people full of great hopes cry up these men as the only fit instruments of state who pretend only to take care for the publique and though they have nothing yet would be thought not to desire any thing Having thus gained the affections of the people their next worke is to pick a quarrell with great officers they conceave because they accuse so zealously it will be presumed they are innocent themselves that by displacing them they may make roome for themselves If such men will not easily out of their preferments the people are acquainted these are the only rubs which stand betwixt them and an happy government these are the close enemies to the State and so much the more dangerous because they carry their malignant designes so secretly they cannot find proofes against them Salus populi is now concerned the whole Kingdome is in danger no way to scape this imminent perill but by tearing these men from the Prince if in a Monarchy or putting them out of the Senate if in an Aristocracy Amongst these distractions and unsettlement of Government what course is to be taken The best way I know but 't is difficult is to make the people wise and make it appeare there is no reall danger except from their tumultuous endeavours to avoyd those which are imaginary Let them rely upon their governours who have most to loose especially if they have given them great late signes of their affection to care of them this is the most probable way of safety but if they should miscarry which they can have no reason to suspect they will perish with a great deale of discretion It seemes unnaturall to me that any nation should be bound to contribute its owne inherent puissance meerely to abet Tyranny and support slavery The inconveniences of Tyranny conclude nothing against just monarchs we are acquainted only with those happy names of King and Subject It is so farre from being unnaturall that any nation should be bound by which I suppose he meaneth consent from which an obligation naturally followes for it is as with him in the Comoedy voluntate coactus sum meâ to contribute it's power to that end that some have made it their choice others their refuge Seneca tells us speaking of the state of Rome in Iulius and Augustus his times Salva esse Roma non poterat nisi beneficio servitutis How is it against nature for the Turkes to be obedient to the grand Seigneur or the
are met We called them and without that call they could not have come together to be our Counsellors not Commanders for however they frequently confound them the offices are severall The writ runs super dictis negotijs tractaturi vestrumque consilium impensuri so that the cleare meaning is their advise is not Law except the Royall assent establish it into an act 'T is alleadged he calls them Counsellors not in all things but in quibusdam arduis c. and the case of Wentworth is cited who being a member of the House of Commons was committed by Q. Eliz. but for proposing they might advise the Queen in a matter Shee thought they had nothing to doe to meddle with He answers a meere example though of Q. Elizabeth is no law It is true a bare example shewes only what was not what ought to be but when grounded on authority and no way excepted against by those who have alwayes been earnest defenders of their Priviledges it may be reckoned amongst sound Presidents what he adds that some of Her actions were retracted is a confirmation of this for this being out of the number it seems it was accompted legall Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis Yet neither did the King so quote this president as to build a right upon it He alleadges the King denyes the Assembly of the Lords and Commons when he withdrawes himselfe to be rightly named a Parliament or to have any power of any court and consequently to be any thing but a meere convention of so many private men This is falsly imposed on His Majesty His Answers and Messages speak the contrary which are directed to both Houses of Parliament Besides He hath passed some bills since his withdrawing All that He affirms is that the sole power of making or repealing lawes and altering any thing established is not in them but if He upon mature deliberation shal preferr the present government to the proposed change then their order is not to have the force of law and oblige the Kingdom The King is said to assert that because the law hath trusted him with a prerogative to discontinue Parliaments therefore if He do discontinue Parliaments to the danger or prejudice of the Kingdome this is no breach of that trust because in formality of law the people may not assemble in Parliament but by His writ This is grosse forgery if it appeare to him necessary or expedient for the Kingdom He acknowledges He is obliged by that trust reposed in him to issue out his writs And to this end He gratiously signed the bill for a trienniall Parliament which like Physick well timed may preserve the body of this state in health and strength by not sufferring ill humors to grow to any head Another assertion of the Kings he saies is if the Parliament make any transition in other matters then what he pleases to propose they are lyable to imprisonment at his pleasure All this he collects from the citation of Wentworths case The sence of his inference is this because they cannot justify the medling with things which belong not to their cognisance therefore they may be punisht if they medle with those that do We may observe an affected mistake in this author of which he makes frequent use and this animadversion though once laid down may often be applyed Whatsoever the Houses do he calls that the Act of the people Whereas the truth is they represent them only to some purposes and ends So that if they exceed their commission and vote things not belonging to their cognisance the People by no meanes is engaged in it as having no legall way of expressing themselves in such cases His Majesty clearly to prove that the trust committed to both Houses cannot bind Him to assent to what ever they propose seem it of never so dangerous consequence to the Kingdom nor absolve Him in point of conscience if His reason tell Him His people will extreamly suffer vnder the grant argues thus It is impossible that the same trust should be irrevocably committed to Us and Our heires for ever and the same trust and a power above that trust for such is the power they pretend be committed to others did not the people that sent them look upon them as a body but temporary and dissoluble at Our pleasure and can it be beleived that they intended them for Our Guardians and comptrollers in the managing of that trust which God and the law hath granted to Us and Our posterity for ever Strange it is that affection should so blinde the understanding and worke mens beliefe not according to reason but desire I must needs think the let lies only in his will else he could never satisfy himselfe with such weak answers It is true faith he two supreames cannot be in the same sence and respect If he had not hoped to hide himselfe in generalls he would have descended to particulars and told us in what sence what respect and what matters the King was supream in what the two Houses But an application would have discovered the truth even to weak understandings Nothing is more knowne or assented to then this that the King is singulis major and yet universis minor I have already evidenced the contrary yet I will speak something to it here By universis he must mean the representative all which therefore he concludes to be above and have greater power then the King that is such a power as He is bound to obey So it seems the King hath taken the oath of allegiance as well as we and we may call Him our fellow subject Yet the oath of Supremacy he tells us is no waies endangered The sense of his reason is because he is a better man then any one of us take us single He tels us He is better then any one He does not tell us He is better then two if the Kings supreamacy be no more but this it is no more then possibly He might have and probably had before He was King It is not the Prince singulis major nay may not any Lord in the Land challenge the same supreamacy over all the Knights any Knight over all esquiers to be singulis major though universis minor But perhaps some othes limitation may be found out the meaning shortly shall be that he is above the Pope in these his dominions not but that He is under His subjects to take of these and all other corrupt glosses I shall refer him to cap. 12. vices 4o. Hen 8. In the preface of which statute the Kings supreamacy not over single persōs but the body Politique is clearly delivered The words are these Where by divers sundry old authentick histories chronicles it is manifestly declared expressed that this Realm of England is an Empire and so hath been accepted in the world governed by one Supream head and King having the dignity and Royall estate of the Imperiall Crown of the same unto whom a Body
Politique compact of all sorts and degrees of people divided in tearmes and by names of spiritualty and temporalty been bounden and owen to beare next to God a naturall and humble obedience If there were no King at all in England you would call this government an Aristocracy and why I beseech you do you not confesse that name now seeing the thing is altogether the same for if they give his voice t is all one as if he had no voice if their power must over-rule his t is all one as if he were devested of all nay why is it thought fit to send to him and sollicite his consent when it is legally past in that the two houses have voted it why to all publique bills do they require this confirmation Le Roy Le voet is it only for the same reason that Bellarmine gives why the Pope being alone infallible calls generall councells ut res suavius transigatur suppose he should returne in answer that of SENECA Si vultis scire an velim efficite ut possim nolle Thus though he plead for a new government he is ashamed to own it by the right name For he tells us not without some indignation at the very thought of such an innovation This new Aristocraticall fabrique cannot seem to any impartiall man but as empty a shadow as airy a dream as ever mans fancy abused it selfe withall I dare say he cannot meet in all histories and records except of such Parliaments as have depos'd Kings which he confesseth no free one ever did with one example of this nature that the two Houses should pretend to a power which must of necessity over-rule the King Indeed a reasonable man cannot imagine any president possible because since the law hath given the King a power by dissolving the Parliament to take away that power as is pretended greater then his own if they had ever made claim to superiority over him he would quickly have put an end to that dispute Before this power be challenged it would befit to vote down that clause in a law made 2. Hen. â— cited by His Majesty that it is of the Kings regality to grant or deny such of their Petitions as pleaseth himselfe Yet notwithstanding this he must be UNIVERSIS MINOR for this wee see in all conditionate Princes such as the Prince of Orange c. I never knew he had Regall power before This instance abundantly manifests his designe though he is pleased to say he speakes nothing in favour of any alteration but is as zealously addicted to Monarchy as any man can without dotage To the most absolute Empire in the world this condition is most naturall and necessary that the safety of the people is to be valued above any right of his It is against common sense to suppose a King that is in his wits me thinkes all good people should take to heart those desperate conclusions which are built upon most unreasonable and most unworthy suppositions of a King that is mad or a child since never subjects had greater obligation to be thankfull to Allmighty God for giving them a Prince as eminently able as vertuous who will not provide for the safety of His people nay who will not part with some of His right rather then they should perish because in their destruction He looses all Yet this does not prove a King should part with His rights as often as they will pretend to be in danger If this were once admitted what wild plots would be invented what strange intelligence would be received from invisible spyes and as often as crafty men were ambitious or covetous so often the filly people were to be frighted Since all naturall power is in those which obey they which contract to obey to their owne ruine or having so contracted they which esteeme such a contract before their owne preservation are felonious to themselves and rebellious to nature He cannot mean any people contracting to their own certain ruine there never was government guilty of this madnes therefore He must understand a contract to a possible ruine for example an agreement patiently to submit themselves to the ordinary tryall of Law and to suffer if it should so fall out though under an undeserved sentence In this case he that does not make resistance and prefer his preservation to his contract is pronounced felo dese and a rebell to nature Unhappy thiefe who for felony is condemned to be hang'd and will be guilty of another felony in being hanged what way is left unto innocency He must kill as many as he can in His own defence so shall He escape or dye in the quarrell either way He hath done right to nature Let us put another case an innocent man by the ordinary course of justice is adjudged to dye upon the testimony of two bearing false witnes he was free from fault before now he is in some danger except he refuse to be punisht he becomes guilty no lesse then a selfe murderer I wonder what opinion this man hath of Martyrs who valew not their owne preservation can he think by submitting themselves to one fire they deserve to be cast into another nay what of Christ himselfe who certainly suffered most injuriously though he had strength enough to preserve himselfe and could have been assisted by an Army of Angells yet he was obedient to death I cannot imagine from what principle he should draw such a conclusion unlesse it be from this whence indeed most of his book will naturally flow that there is no such thing as justice but suprema lex the paramount law is profit and the faults of men consist in the not violation of contracts in the not breaking promises if they be for their disadvantage for it were a sinne against native liberty to make our selves the slaves of justice If we examine the ground of this doctrine most destructive of all commerce all government we shall discover it to be no other but this that the law of nature doth allow a man to defend himselfe and provide for his owne preservation But the observer takes no notice that it is in our power to part with this right yet doe nothing contrary to nature if reason tell us we shall thereby obtaine a more excellent good the benefit of peace and society nay that this restraining Our selves by compact of that naturall liberty to defend our selves will conduce more to that end for which it was given us our preservation and safety Because in probability we shall be in lesse danger living amongst men who have agreed to be governed by certaine lawes then if every one followed his owne inclination Where one suffers hereby wrongfully thousands enjoy the benefit of being protected from wrong And therefore though it should happen to me in particular to be condemned by the magistrate without cause I am bound to suffer patiently because having made such a bargain which might have been profitable I have no right
in the fidelity of others If it could have been averred as it could not for the contrary was true that this would have bred disturbance and have been the occasion of greater danger Truly then he shall get the better if he can impose upon our sense and make the Kingdom beleeve contrary to what they see and suffer under What hath been the cause of these unhappy distractions but as the taking the Kings Towne from him by force and the illegall alteration of the Militia upon pretence of apparent danger Though for a time they were afraid where no feare was quis illis sic timere permisit yet after they have had so long a time to recover their understandings and to consider with themselves if the danger were apparent it might in so many months be made evident and they might know whence to expect the blow I dare now appeale to the weakest part of men their distrusts and aske them if they can now believe there was any just ground for jealousies It is not improbable since they have raised a house without a foundation it may fall upon the heads of the master builders Where the people by publique authority will seek any inconvenience to themselves and the King is not so much interessed in it as themselves 't is more inconvenience and injustice to deny then to grant it More injustice to deny then grant therefore it seemes that injustice too Into what streights must a King be brought by the mindes of the people If they seek any inconvenience injustice to deny it O unheard of Maxims out of these new Politiques that a King should be bound by Law to destroy his people and kill them out of duty that he doth not preserve their rights except he doe them wrong This affabile odium hath often had but never deserved thanks Can a man imagine those people of whom Juvenall speaks Evertêre domos totas optantibus ipsis Dii faciles if they had understood their own prayers would have accused the Gods for denying them Charior est Regipopulus quà m sibi How great are His deserts towards His People that will not suffer them to be miserable though they intreat him though they provoke him to it and can content himselfe with the conscience of merit whilst his honour suffers under the envy of wrong doing Indeed this is the end of all government for the people finding they were not fit to govern themselves resolved to be ruled by those that were wiser and so committed their safety to the trust of others Now this were to reduce themselves to that first state which their sufferings made them weary of to place a Governour over them and to governe that Governour What blame is it then in Princes when they will pretend reluctance of conscience and reason No man justifies pretended conscience no man can condemne reall But what grounds can malice have to cast this aspersion of pretence of conscience and reason If we looke either on that unhappy misunderstanding of the people who would not be undeceaved by pretences his actions must appeare unto them as cleare as the day or on his owne necessities his owne extreame wants it cannot be For certainly he that hath granted so much in this Parliament and that in a short time as put all his Royall Ancestors Acts of grace together they fall much short of his would not have denyed any thing which was reasonable not any thing since his wants required supplyes from them but what should put him into farre worse condition then that of Poverty After a long and generall discourse of the originall of government the various formes and severall distempers whil'st policy was yet imperfect he returnes to the present matter The vertue of Representation hath been denyed to the Commons and a severance has been made betwixt the parties chosen and the parties choosing and so that great priviledge of all priviledges that unmoveable Basis of all honour and power whereby the House of Commons claimes the entire right of all the Gentry and commonalty of England has been attempted to be shaken and disturbed The sense of it is a trust is committed to them and they are to be guided according to conscience in the performance of it Let it be so but is not this cleerly the Kings case who is entrusted certainly as highly as they So that they will find the ready way to endanger their own rights is to entrench upon the Kings Yet there may be a mistake in the imputation of severance and denyall of representation to the Commons For put the case if a few men of a County present a Petition to the House against established lawes and the setled Discipline of the Church this is received and thanks returned if after another Petition modestly and discreetly expressing their desires and withall due respects to the House as to instance in that most excellent Petition of Kent be presented attested by men much more eminent then the former whether we respect number Gentry meanes or reputation and this in favour of present government which they have found happy by long experience and therefore have no reason to be so desirous of a change of which they are not able to judge so well without tryall this by no meanes is to be called a severance or denyall of representation though I confesse the Kingdome apt to mistake may easily be deceived and learn to miscall it because the Gentlemen were imprisoned who presented it Most of our late distempers and obstructions in Parliaments have proceeded from this that the people upon causelesse defamation and unproved accusations have been so prone to withdraw themselves from their representatives and yet there can be nothing under Heaven next to renouncing God which can be more perfidious and more pernitious in the people then this Here we may see the strength of passion above reason Certainly we never took the oath of Supremacy nor of Allegiance unto them Hence it will evidently follow that Treason against a Burgesse is higher then that against the King This he grants as unquestionable that the legislative power of this Kingdome is partly in the King and partly in the Kingdome so that neither the King can make a generall binding Ordinance or Law without the Parliament or the Parliament without the King This one truth if constantly stood to would have prevented our miseryes and if yet embraced might restore the Kingdome to happinesse But alas it is soon recalled as bolding only in ordinary cases but if the safety of the people be concerned if it may prove dangerous or inconvenient to them then an extraordinary course may justly be taken This is it which hath so miserably rent this Kingdome and caused these sad divisions First the people are made beleeve they are in danger and then a prevention of those dangers is promised This must needs be very gratefull to them so out of that naturall love they bear to themselves they favour that side
AN ANSWER TO A PRINTED BOOK INTITULED OBSERVATIONS UPON SOME OF HIS MAIESTIES LATE ANSWERS and Expresses Printed by His MAIESTIES Command AT OXFORD By LEONARD LICHFIELD Printer to the Vniversity 1642. AN ANSWER TO A PRINTED BOOKE INTITULED OBSERVATIONS Vpon some of His MAIESTIES late Answers and Expresses IN this discourse concerning Regall authority it is needlesse to wast time in declaring the originall since it is granted to be at least mediately from God Who intending the good of mankind which was not to be obtained without preservation of order hath therefore commanded all to be subject to the lawes of society not only for wrath but for conscience sake not only whil'st they enjoy the benefit of Governours but likewise whilst they doe suffer under some accidentall abuses The reason of which obligation may be this we cannot reap the constant fruits of an established policy unlesse by compact we submit our selves to some possible inconveniences Hence it follows after a people hath by solemne contract devested it selfe of that power which was primarily in them they cannot upon what pretence soever without manifest breach of divine ordinance and violation of publique faith resume that authority which they have placed in another to the end that being united in one it may thence receive strength be enabled to protect all as also to prevent those fatall divisions which attend multitudes endued with equall power where almost every one upon reall or fancyed injuries undertakes to right himselfe and although before positive constitution this is not absolutely unjust yet reason informes us it is most fit by some agreement to part with this native right in consideration of greater good and prevention of greater evills which will ensue and to restraine our selves from being judges in our own cause It followes moreover though the people should conceave they might live more happily if the Kings prerogative were more bounded his revenews diminished and it is no hard matter to perswade them to think so to effect this wants not so much rhetorique as malice since what is taken from the King turnes to their present profit though they oft-times dearely pay for it by disabling their King to provide for their security it were high sinne to entrench upon his rights For hereby they loosen the very sinewes of government by receding from that compact which crafty men out of their own private interests perswade them they might have made more advantagious It doth no way prejudice Regall authority that God is the author of Aristocraticall he may adde Democraticall power also If these were not lawfull formes of government their execution of judgement would be sinne and whilst they punish they would commit murder Yet in these kindes we may observe more or lesse perfection according to the aptnes they beare to those ends which States ayme at which are safety and plenty To haue riches and not be able to defend them is to expose our selves as a prey to be safe and poore is to be securely miserable Besides if we had leisure to look back to the Originall of Governments we might finde that God was the immediate donor of Regall power whereas other formes referre to him onely as confirming the peoples Act. This the Author cunningly dissembles and therefore treading in the steps of Mariana and Buchanan sworn enemies to Monarchy he presents us with J know not what rude multitudes living without lawes without government till such time as out of the sense of their sufferings which evidently proceeded from this want they were inforced to fly to such remedies However this fancy might passe for currant among such heathen Polititians as were ignorant of the originall of the world dreamed that the first men were bred as Insects out of the mud of the earth whence that frequent mention in their writings of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Aborigenes yet we who are satisfied with the history of the creation cannot imagine that Anarchy was before a regulated Government and that God who had digested one Chaos into order should leave the most noble creatures in a worse confusion unlesse we will deny to Adam either that power or providence which is naturall and ordinary in a father over his children and granted by this observer pag. 18. to be more then the King can challenge over his people We find in this infancy of the world upon the multiplying of mankinde Colonies were sent out and a City was built by Cain Those long lived Patriarchs had this advantage by begetting a numerous posterity they might people a Nation out of their own loynes and be saluted Patres patriae without a metaphor the same being their subjects and their children In relation to this it was properly said by the Ancients a Kingdome was but a larger family Aristotle tells us a Regall power belonged to the Paterfamilias and accordingly Homer I. 1. pol. c. 8. Odyssâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that it was then no more possible in right for such a people to choose their rulers then to choose their Fathers Thus Regall power sprang first from Paternall and Trogus made a truer observation then this author when he said Principio rerum as well as gentium nationumque imperium penes reges erat And therefore may challenge more from God nature then other formes of government and certainly it hath received larger elogies from God in Scripture then any other can pretend to To say nothing of the Kings of Israel who are confest by the adversary to be of divine institution very heathen Monarchs are acknowledged by God himselfe to be no lesse Where he calls Nebuchadrezzar his servant Ier. 43.10 and Cyrus his annointed Es 45.1 Notwithstanding this to the end I may give the clearest satisfaction I have thought it fit not to take advantage from the excellency of Monarchy whether in regard to its antiquity as being not much younger then man himselfe or the severall commodities thereof For the truth is it were no excuse for such endeavours of innovation were it the most imperfect governement I shall therefore take into consideration this Authors grounds in the method they lye upon which he would overthrow so ancient and well founded a monarchye His first exception is The King attributeth the originall of his Royalty to God and the Law making no mention of the grant consent or trust of man therein A groundles cavill wheÌ„ God is first named under what notion can be apprehend Law but as an agreement of the people deriving their power and committing the Kingdom to his trust within few lines he confutes himselfe telling us that Law which the King mentioneth is not to be understood to be any speciall ordinance sent from heaven by the ministery of Angels or Prophets as amongst the Iewes it sometimes was It can be nothing else amongst Christians but the pactions and agreements of such and such politique corporations if so he might have spared this observation That Dominion which
French Pesant to his Prince There may be reasonable motives why a people should consent to slavery as if in danger of a potent enemy they could hire none on gentler conditions to undertake their defence or if reduced to extream want they had not wherewith to sustain themselves they may very probably like Esau passe away their birthright liberty We finde an example of each case in holy Scripture The Egyptians parted with all their mony and cattle and past away the right to their lands and became servants to Pharaoh Gen. 47. upon this condition that Joseph would afford them bread Jos 9. And the Gibeonites bought their lives of the children of Israel with the price of their liberty and thought they had a cheap purchase From the word trust used by his Majesty he gathers the King does admit his interest in the crown in part conditionate No ground for this collection for there may be a trust and that is so much the greater if free from condition But the thing is true de facto in some sense and his Majestie hath alwaies acknowledged He is bound to maintain the rights and liberty of the subject Yet we must not so understand it as if the right to His Kingdome were so conditionate that it were capable of forfeiture upon a not exact performance of covenant As for the word elegerit whether it be future or past it skills not much If he take notice of the conclusion deduced thence he may find as much difference between the Tenses as between Democracy Monarchy But the consuetudines which cannot refer to the future undeniably evinces it was meant of the time past and the oath in english is free from all ambiguity rendring consuetudines quas vulgus elegerit by rightfull customes which the commonalty of this your Kingdome have I may adde the different manner of the Kings answer as it is set down in their Remonstrance Where to other questions which respect the future the King answers in the future in this as referring to what is past He answers per verba de praesenti concedo permitto The King is bound to consent to new lawes if they be necessary as well as defend the old His Majestie never thought otherwise but He is not bound to an implicite faith to believe all necessary which is pretended to be so The word elegerit if it be in the preterperfecttense yet shewes that the peoples election had been the ground of ancient lawes and customes and why the peoples election in Parliament should not be now of as great moment as ever J cannot discover The election there spoken of is the election of the diffusive not of any representative body and that with the tacite consent of the Prince and so of much other authority and for the representative their ancient right is not denyed no law shall be abrogated none enacted without their assent But there is a mean between doing nothing and all The result of all is our Kings cannot be said to have so unconditionate and high a propriety in all the subjects lives liberties and possessions or in any thing else to the crown appertaining as subjects have in the Kings dignity The King pretends not to have any unconditionate proprietie in the subjects lives liberties and possessions he would onely be allowd it in his own And what he can mean by subjects having an unconditionate and high propriety in the Kings dignity surpasses my understanding It may seem to speak this wicked doctrine that subjects may dispose of the Soveraignty as they please for this right an absolute propriety gives If the King had such high right as subjects it were not lawfull or naturall for him to expose his life and fortune for his country How is it lawfull for subjects then to doe so The people have as great nay greater obligation of exposing their lives for the King This appeares by the Protestation as also by the ancient oath of fealty at the Coronation Je deviene vostre Liege de vie de biens c. Sir Hen Spelman gives us a form of sacramentum ligiantiae still in use Tu I. S. jurabis quòd ab ista die in antea eris sidelis legalis leaux domino nostro Regi suis haeredibus fidelitatem legalitatem Leaultie ei portabis de vita de membro de terreno honore quòd tu eorum malum aut damnum nec noveris nec audiveris quod non defendes i.e. prohibebis pro posse tuo ita Deus te adjuvet I cannot imagine any possible colour for such an inference I would sooner make a rope of sand hang together may not a tyrant expose his life in defence of his slave without breach of any law He doth but defend his owne goods â—xod 21.1 for the Scripture calls his slave his money His owne instance confutes him bonus pastor ponit vitam pro ovibus suis for it is evident this good pastor was our Saviour absolute Lord of his flock Parliaments have the same efficient cause as Monarchyes if not higher What higher then the law of God and of the whole land yes for in truth the whole Kingdome is not so properly the author as the essence itselfe of Parliaments just as a Proctour is the essence of him for whom he appeares or an Ambassador is essentially the King But suppose it true this declares the materiall cause proves no greater dignity in the efficient But the reason is to come by the former rule he had no good fortune with that before 't is magis tale because we see ipsum quid quod efficit tale what magis tale in essences or can a thing be magis tale then it selfe This I conceave is beyond the sense of the house However this confession and the rule quod efficit tale est magis tale subjects the Parliament to the people as well as the same rule would doe the King and proves as well that the Parliament is vniversis minus though it be singulis majus Parliaments have also the same finall cause as Monarchyes if not greater what greater then salus populi nay then to promote the Subject to all kind of Politicall happines which he told us was the end and duty of a King His reason is publique safety and liberty could not be so effectually provided for by Monarchs till Parliaments were constituted This proves not the end higher but shewes they are good helpes in government which is readily granted Two things especially are aimed at in Parliaments not to be attained to by other meanes Not so easily attained indeed but certainly many Kingdomes have enjoyed a most high degree of civill happines under arbitrary Monarchs who knew no Parliaments Such as have abundantly satisfied the inter est of the people in all weighty affaires advised with the ablest counsellors Two other ends might have been named as essentiall as those which are to supply his Majesties
wants by subsidies and assent to the abrogation of old lawes and enacting new as necessity shall require In the summons of Edw. 1. claus 7. m. 3. dors we see the first end of Parliaments expressed for he inserts in the writ that whatsoever affaire is of publique concernement ought to receive publique approbation Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbari debet or tractari I have not the convenience of examining this record and therefore cannot be able to satisfie my selfe in circumstances which perhaps might afford some light to the cleerer understanding of this rule For the present therefore I will allow it to be certaine law though he would not be willing I should have the same liberty and argue the legality of a thing from a Princes bare affirmation and see what advantage he can make of it It seems to me to be deduced from an evident principle of reason and to flow hence it is against equity that the act of one should prejudice another without his consent There is much caution required to the managing this rule For if it be understood in its full latitude without all limitation it will dissolve the bonds of Government by reducing us to that primitive state wherein every one had absolute right to dispole of his owne as he pleased Therefore we must take into consideration that multitudes finding a necessity of Government did restraine this native right by positive Constitutions so that in the best governed States the greater part of men were presumed by a fiction of law to handle and approve such things as they never heard of The ground of which fiction is very reasonable for the people though they are not advised with may well be said to consent to what their rulers doe because they have entrusted them with their safety which without this power convaied into such or such hands could not be so effectually provided for Thus in absolute Monarchies what Princes doe is legally the act of all thus in our Kingdom two hundred thousand debate and approve things by the suffrages of two who many times vote quite contrary to their desires who have entrusted them and yet the people shall be said in law to affirme what really and in truth they doe deny The result of all is this those things which the law doth require shall be transacted only by Parliament the people doe handle approve of by their Knights or Burgesses in those things which the Law hath entrusted the King with many of which concerne the good of the whole what he does is their act Hence it may appear the Kings Writ by which he calls the Houses together to consult de quibusdam arduis urgentibus negotiis is no waies opposite to this supposed Law understood with due limitations The desire of the Commons in the Raigne of Edw. 3. seems to mee fully to justify the same which was that they might not advise in things de queux ils n'ont pas cognizance The matters in debate were of no small concernment being no lesse then the setling intestine commotions guarding the marches of Scotland and the Seas But the answer is herein they renounce not their right of consent they only excuse themselves in point of counsell referring it rather to the King and his Councell Here then we have the judgement of the House of Commons that in affaires of some nature and those too very much concerning the safety of the whole Kingdome there may be fitter Counsellors then they are I had conceived n' avoir pas cognizance had not signified to be ignorant or not to understand things so thoroughly since cognisance uses to be taken in a Law-notion and to signifie a right of handling matters judicially or power and jurisdiction as cognisance of Plea We meet with a very observable passage and which will give us great light in this buisines it is to be seen in a diary MS. of the Parliament held 1. Hen. 4. Et le lundy ensuivant S. lendemayn des almes les communes priont qu'eux ne soyiant pas entrez en les rolles de Parlement come parties as juggementez quex sount donez acest Parlement mes la ou ils sount in rei veritate partie et prive a cella quar lez juggementz appartient solement au Roy fosque la ou ascun juggement est renduz sur vn estatute feat par le comune prositz de Royalme Le quel fuist grante In English thus And the munday following scil the morrow after all Soules-day the Commons prayed that they might not be entred upon the Roles of the Parliament as parties to any judgements given this Parliament save only where in rei veritate they are part and privy thereto For that the judgements appertaine only to the King except where any judgement is given vpon a Statute made for the common profit of the Kingdome The which was granted How this shall derogate from Parliaments either in point of consent or counsell I doe not know for at last they did give both and the King would not be satisfied without them and the passage evinces no more but this that that King was very wise and warlike and had a very wise Counsell of Warr so that in those particulars the Commons thought them most fit to be consulted as perhaps the more knowing men The conclusion which more naturally followes is this when the King requires and will not otherwise be satisfied they may advise in matters not properly of their cognisance The conclusion by which he thinkes he hath gained so much may without any inconvenience be assented to These words ad tract andum or dinandum saciendum doe fully prove that the people in those dayes were sâ—mmoned ad consensum as well as ad consilium Be it so in those things which belong to their cognisance The formes which are used in passing a bill confesse so much les Communes ont assentés and les Seignevrs out assenás I have not yee done with his rule Quod omnes tangit ah omnibus approbari debet It is true the most popular state could never punctually observe it For some of the poorer some of the younger sort and women generally by reason of their sex are excluded yet all those having lives to loose are concerned in the publique safety But with what equity can he then thinke a considerable party of this Kingdome can be denyed the benefit of that which he conceives a most reasonable law I meane the Clergy who certainly cannot deserve to forfeit the priviledge of common men because they are more immediately the servants of God His next endeavour is to shew that Parliaments have been much lessened and injuried of late by some passages in his Majesties answers But he can never make it appeare that any part of their truly ancient power is denyed to them The Kings words are what the extent of their Commission and Trust is nothing can better teach them then the writ whereby they
to recall it when it appears disadvantageous I owe that I have been safe thus long to the benefit of this covenant therefore am bound in justice to share the inconveniences If reason will not satisfie perhaps Christianity may Qui resistunt potestati Rom. 13. ipsi sibi damnationem acquirunt To resist the magistrate damnable The powers here spoken of were heathen yet Christ commanded his to be subject even to them That answer with which too many are deceived cannot excuse disobedience and Rebellion This precept obliges private men but not magistrates Since inferiour magistrates being opposed to the supreame power are but as private men and in this respect the reason of obedience is common to both Neither is this a hard law if duly considered If we suffer justly we have no reason to complain if undeservedly we are punished but not hurt The magistrate is Dei minister nobis in bonum because God will abundantly reward us for our patient suffering in obedience to his command But this is against nature He must mean nature guided by right reason and doth that dictate that rather then part with a temporall life we ought to forfeit an eternall It is objected that a temporary power ought not to be greater then that which is lasting and vnalterable He does not frame the Kings argument aright which concludes on this ground that it is not probable the lawes should place a power greater then his in such a body and yet leave it to his disposall when to call that body together when to dissolve it that is to determine when and how long he would be over-ruled when be King again His Majesty presses it farther which he dissembles This trust being irrevocably committed to Him and His heires for ever it cannot be conceived how it should sleep during the sitting of the Houses But if this were so the Romans had done unpolitiquely in creating Dictators when any great extremity assailed them and yet we know it was very prosperous to them sometimes to change the form of government Hence we may conclude it good policy in imminent danger to trust to a Monarchy not an Aristocracy and much lesse to a democracy The Romans successe cannot be imputed meerely to their change but to this that they altered their form from worse to better as to their present ends but that will not justifie his desire of innovation from better to worse It is further objected He sayes if we allow the Lords and Commons to be more then counsellors we make them Comptrollers and this is not suitable to Royalty He answers we say here that to consent is more then to counsell and yet not alwayes so much as to command and comptroll True not alwayes but then it is when their consent shall impose a necessity upon the King of doing the like He hath not laid down his Majesties words faithfully The point He stands on is that their advise is not His law neither is He bound to captivate His reason or submit His conscience to their Votes Yes it must be so because in inferiour Courts the Judges are so counsellors for the King as that the King may not countermand their judgements and yet it were a harsh thing to say that they are therefore Guardians and Comptrollers of the King therefore it holds in Parliaments a fortiori The reason why the King cannot countermand their judgement is because they sustain His person and His consent is by law involv'd in what by law they do and there would be no end if He should undoe what He hath done Authoritas rei judicatae vim legis habet there can be no appeal from himselfe to himselfe He therefore makes the Judges take an oath they will deny to no man common right by His letters because He is not to passe sentence in private but in publique and in a Judiciall way That it is his owne act appears from this that He delegates his power to them and this is a known rule Quod Rex facit per officiarios per se facere videtur The truth is Kings have a right and heretofore they made use of it to sit in judicature personally Camden tells us that Bancus Regius ita dictus erat â—rit 112. quòd Rex ipse in eo praesidere solebat Sir Tho Smith too in his description of England Subsellia Regia vulgo Bancus Regius ex eo sortita sunt appellationem l. 2. c. 14. quia ibi ipsi Angliae Regessedere consueverunt This Court was called the Kings Bench because the King sate as judge in it in His proper person It removed with the King as is to be seen 9. Hen. 3. cap. 11. by which the Court of common Pleas is fixed Common pleas shall not follow our court but shall be holden in some certain place Moreover the Judges swear they will not assent to any thing which may turne the King in damage or disherison by any manner way or colour 18. Edw 3. when he can make these things agree to the two Houses he shall conclude from the Iudges sentence to their votes But since it will clearly appeare that they are not the mouth of the King the Lords sitting in a personall capacity and the House of Commons as representing the body of the Kingdom though not that to all intents and purposes the inference must by no means be granted I shall adde this to make the answer more clear and to avoid mistake in matters of Law there lyes an appeal to them a writ of errour being brought as to the highest Court not so in matters of state Because whilst they passe sentence according to known lawes the state is no way indangered thereby but if they challenge to themselves a liberty of passing sentence according to reason of state they may when they please overthrow our lawes The Counties which intrusted them looke upon them as Judges not Politicians But we ought not to conceive that they well either Councell or consent to any thing but what is publiquely advantagious When the King conceives they do not otherwise He will most willingly follow their advise This fallacy though extreamly weak hath influenced on all his book He takes the two Houses in such a Notion as not failing of their duty but doing every thing as they ought and supposeth the King to be wanting to that trust which is committed to him By such Councell and consent we cannot imagine the King limited or lessened Such a Consent in which his is necessarily involv'd renders his Power not so properly lesse as none at all it doth not limit but take it away Pray put the Case a thousand pounds is left to Titius and Sempronius to be bestowed upon joynt consent Sempronius being just and reasonable grants to Titius the right of a Negative so that without he will concurre he confesses he can doe nothing The King doth not pretend to have power of repealing old or constituting new Lawes without them Titius
which pretends to take care of their safety His way of arguing is very plausible and seemeth to carry more strength because it worketh upon our understanding by our affection The summe is this in case of apparent and imminent danger the Peoples safety is not to be neglected they ought not to be exposed as a Prey to the enemy who if he take them unprovided will destroy them all therefore most fit they should be put into a posture of defence now none so fit Iudges of this apparent and imminent danger as the two Houses wherefore they to order this Militia So that it must be in their power to command Men raise Horses seize on all the Ammunition send for what supplies of mony they think necessary for repelling these dangers else they are not sufficiently enabled for that great work the peoples preservation Here we are falne back again into what we so much complained of Arbitrary power nor is the thing taken away but placed in another body all that we have gained is only this we shall not be beaten by the same hand Was not this the very case of Ship-mony upon supposall of a necessity and the Kingdom being in danger very fit to secure it and the people this cannot be done without money the danger will not allow the delay of asking the Subjects consent and going the ordinary way of Law therefore an extraordinary course them becomes legall and very reasonable it is the Subject should be content to part with some rather then loose all now who fitter to judge of this necessity then the King as being most fully informed by His advantage of intelligence from His Embassadors Agents c. of the designes of forraigne Princes and States To wind our selves out of this Labyrinth we will goe on those grounds on which they argued against Ship-mony for as the Argument runnes parallell so will the answer This therefore was laid downe as a sure ground of reason that it was better for the Kingdom though it were in reall danger in arenâ consilium capere to shift for it selfe as well as it was able by a suddain defence then that the Law should provide such a remedy which would be so easily so frequently abused upon every pretence of danger to prevent such an evill which could extreamly seldome or almost never happen for an Army and Navy could not be so secretly provided but that we must have some intelligence of it So in the case of the Militia it is much better that by being continued in the old legall way it should hazard it selfe to such a possible danger then that Law should provide such a remedy for what probably will never happen as being abused upon pretences may every three years put the Kingdom in combustion To repell danger any way but by Law is the greatest danger of all Let the world judge whether the pronouncing Sr Iohn Hotham's act Treason be not contrary to the clearest beams of humane reason and the strongest inclinations of nature for every private man may defend himselfe by force if assaulted though by the force of a Magistrate or his own father and though he be not without all confidence by flight He is strongly resolved upon the conclusion that will bring it in upon such premises Sr John Hotham his asseizing on the Kings Towne and Ammunition was it seemes in his own defence who assaulted him did His Majesty drive him into Hull what can he think of the Gunpowder-traitors was their resistance a just defence then certainly every Rebellion is a just warre Indeed what is that thing which we call obedience if a man may refuse to submit to Law in his own defence Here whole Nations being exposed to enmity and hazard being utterly uncapable of flight must yeeld their throats and submit to assassinates if their King will not allow them defence There is great difference betwixt a Subjects defending himselfe and offending his King His fears are over-witty if they will not permit him to think himselfe safe except he get into one of the Kings sorts for his better security See if we are not left as a prey to the same bloody hands as have done such diabolicall exploits in Ireland c. if we may not take up armes for our own safety or if it be possible for us to take up armes without some Votes or Ordinances to regulate the Militia Subjects upon in vasion would not have wanted Commission to take up armes till then they are safe enough by the benefit of the Law which could not possibly have better provided for their safety then by denying them a power to take armes as often as ambitious choletick men for their own ends shall perswaâ—e them they are it danger For by this meanes being easily deceived whilest they endeavoured to avoyd false they would run themselves headlong into true perills The King saies the Parliament denies c. to whether now in this uncertainty is the Subject bound to adhere It is possible circumstances may afford us some light for our direction We may consider whether the Houses doe not barely say and whether His Majesty doth not descend so farre as to give reasons for what He does and to shew the Kingdom the ground of His actions by particular citation of the Lawes which justify them We ought to agree whether swerving from Law be to be judged by the action or by the authors that is if the King should have done whatever they did and the Houses what ever He did whether all would not then have been legall because done by them The King doth not desire to captivate any mans understanding to His authority but is willing to make all the world the judge of His actions neither is a blind obedience a part of any mans duty to the Houses The best way to discerne a right will be to consult the rule which is Law and not measure the legality of an act by the doer Some things are matters of fact here we may be guided by sense and judge as we see As whether the King has seized on any thing wherein the Subject hath a property or whether the Subject hath not seized upon something wherein the King hath a property whether the King hath raised warre against the Parliament that is whether His Guard was an Army and whether Hull is now London We had a maxime and it was grounded upon nature and never till this Parliament withstood that a community can have no private ends to mislead it and make it injurious to it selfe True in a state where the collective body assembles and the reason of it is evident for though every man aime at his greatest particular interest yet except it be agreeable to the interest of the major part it will never passe into an Act and if it be advantageous for the most it is to be esteemed publique Now what service this can doe the two Houses I cannot see because they are a representative body If
leave given He sayes nothing can take of this it was fully intended the Members should have had a legall and speedy tryall for His Majesty conceives it high injustice to clap men up upon a bare charge and after they are in prison forget there are such men in the world The Parliament does not deny the King a true reall interest in anything held by him either in jure Coronae or in jure Personae but only affirmes that in the same thing the State hath an interest Paramont in cases of publique extremity by vertue of which it may justly seize and use the same for its own necessary preservation The King is a part of the state and therefore the other part hath not any power warranted by Law to doe what they think fit to His prejudice upon pretence of publique extremity This is ship-money again in every mans lands goods the State hath an interest Paramount in cases of publique extremity by vertue of which it may justly seize and use the same for its own necessary preservation Here 's the difference the head without the body was the State before now it is the body without a head The King hath graciously freed us from that inconvenience and we hope He will not suffer us to be opprest with this The prudence of our lawes hath provided against either but were there a necessity we must fall into one we ought in reason to choose the former we are acquainted with that and therefore could better digest it It would be a great affliction to fall from such hopes and what we lookt on as a remedy to find that our disease but especially it would be lesse burthen to our estates to satisfy one then five hundred But the King's things are still reserved for him in better hands then he would have put them Though this were true it were an ill president for the Subject who must be bound to give up his meanes as oft as they conceive they could dispose it more wisely as they yet keep them away from him for his good so hereafter they may spend them against him for his advantage Let what will be pretended the Subject cannot be so stupid as not to understand these who undertake to manage the Paramount interest of the State may seize on any subjects fortunes by the same right they take the King 's That there is an Arbitrary power in every State somewhere 't is true 't is necessary and no inconvenience followes upon it If he mean by arbitrary a legislative power this is granted yet not to a part but the whole body But this speakes not to the case for still they give us a certain rule to live by The old lawes are in force till repealed and when new are once enacted we must conform our actions to those standing rules He is to justifie there is such a Paramount Law which shall make all our other lawes truly Oracles that is capable of contrary meanings So that now a man may be justly punisht for doing such a thing because he hath disobeyed the letter of the law a week after he shall be justly punisht too for not doing the same thing because he hath disobeyed the equity of the Law Aristotle tells us and 't is very wisely said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rhet. l. 1. c. 1. Those lawes are with greatest prudence established which define most cases and leave nothing which possibly may be determined to the brest of the judge The reason of it is this Lawes are made without any respects to persons it cannot be foreseen what parties would be engaged but Judges doe not allwayes abstract from these they may be mislead by the relation of Kinsman friend Patron or other interests Now how fully may these corrupt ends be satisfied by this equitable construction of Law Mr Hooker does not say that the Anabaptists in Germany did deceive Parliaments with their hypocrisye No man told you he did we only learne thus much from that story of their foul injustice and cruelty that upon proportionable principles such mischiefes being then may be again For example if a power be placed in a certain body of men by which they are allowed to breake all inferiour lawes if they think it is for the good of the people c and if this body be backt by the greater part of the people as having gained on their affections by fair promises of a perfect reformation and that they shall at length enjoy the purity and simplicity of the Gospell in this case may it not be a sufficient motive to take away mens estates because they cannot confide in them is it not just to take from enemies of the State the power of hurting it 'T is very obvious that for those men of whom they have no good opinion to have wealth may be a crime to have honours treasonable As for the thirty Tyrants of Athens we know they were not chosen by the people as our Knights Citizens c This circumstance alters not the case if after they are elected they challenge as unquestionable and as irrevocable power But the main intent of that instance was to shew there may be a tyranny of many and that much more miserable then that of one in many respects If the inordinate desires of one are hardly satisfied how much more may we suffer under those of many we cannot hope to weary them If we must be slaves better to have one master then foure hundred Though the blowes were equall that from a Royall hand would not smart so much it wounds the very soul to be trampled on by equalls The weight of present evills would lesse afflict then the fear of future There may be continuall supply of torment new and hungry flyes may succeed in the room of the old and suck strongly not regarding many have already been glutted Neither can we expect an end of these miseries such a body is immortall whereas the vices of a Prince are personall and dye with the man we may be restored to happinesse by His successor I will in briefe relate the story of their reigne They had got into their hands the power of declaring what was Law and this by the consent of the people In the beginning they call some men into Question who were much hated by the Citty and though the law could not take hold of them so farre yet they past sentence of death This was very plausible to most who judged of this proceeding by the rule of their present affections not looking so farre into the future as to consider what ill consequences this might produce for by the same way innocent men might be cut off if they were pleas'd to call them enemies of the State After this they gave some part of publique authority to three thousand of the Cittizens and disarmed all the rest by this means and the benefit of a Militia from Sparta the Citty was wholly in their disposall In a short time they had