Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n act_n crown_n parliament_n 2,582 5 6.5434 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A60214 Discourses concerning government by Algernon Sidney ... ; published from an original manuscript of the author. Sidney, Algernon, 1622-1683. 1698 (1698) Wing S3761; ESTC R11837 539,730 470

There are 15 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

most opposite to his Maxims He lived says he in Henry the third's time since Parliaments were instituted as if there had bin a time when England had wanted them or that the establishment of our Liberty had bin made by the Normans who if we will believe our Author came in by force of Arms and oppressed us But we have already proved the Essence of Parliaments to be as antient as our Nation and that there was no time in which there were not such Councils or Assemblies of the People as had the power of the whole and made or unmade such Laws as best pleased themselves We have indeed a French word from a People that came from France but the Power was always in our selves and the Norman Kings were obliged to swear they would govern according to the Laws that had bin made by those Assemblies It imports little vvhether Bracton lived before or after they came amongst us His vvords are Omnes sub eo ipse sub nullo sed tantum sub Deo All are under him and he under none but God only If he offend since no Writ can go out against him their Remedy is by petitioning him to amend his Faults which if he will not do it is punishment enough for him to expect God as an avenger Let none presume to look into his Deeds much less to oppose him Here is a mixture of Sense and Nonsense Truth and Falshood the vvords of Bracton vvith our Author's foolish Inferences from them Bracton spoke of the politick capacity of the King vvhen no Law had forbidden him to divide it from his natural He gave the name of King to the sovereign Power of the Nation as Jacob called that of his Descendents The Scepter vvhich he said should not depart from Judah till Shiloh came tho all men know that his Race did not reign the third part of that time over his own Tribe nor full fourscore years over the whole Nation The same manner of speech is used in all parts of the world Tertullian under the name of Cesar comprehended all magistratical Power and imputed to him the Acts of which in his person he never had any knowledg The French say their King is always present sur son lit de justice in all the Sovereign Courts of the Kingdom which are not easily numbred and that Maxim could have in it neither sense nor truth if by it they meant a Man who can be but in one place at one time and is always comprehended within the Dimensions of his own Skin These things could not be unknown to Bracton the like being in use amongst us and he thought it no offence so far to follow the dictates of Reason prohibited by no Law as to make a difference between the invisible and omnipresent King who never dies and the Person that wears the Crown whom no man without the guilt of Treason may endeavour to kill since there is an Act of Parliament in the case I will not determine whether he spoke properly or no as to England but if he did not all that he said being upon a false supposition is nothing to our purpose The same Bracton says the King doth no wrong in as much as he doth nothing but by Law The Power of the King is the Power of the Law a power of right not of wrong Again If the King dos injustice he is not King In another place he has these words The King therefore ought to exercise the Power of the Law as becomes the Vicar and Minister of God upon Earth because that Power is the Power of God alone but the Power of doing wrong is the Power of the Devil and not of God And the King is his Minister whose Work he dos Whilst he dos Justice he is the Vicar of the Eternal King but if he deflect from it to act unjustly he is the Minister of the Devil He also says that the King is singulis major universis minor and that he who is in justitia exequenda omnibus major in justitia recipienda cuilibet ex plebe fit aequalis I shall not say Bracton is in the right when he speaks in this manner but 't is a strange impudence in Filmer to cite him as a Patron of the absolute Power of Kings who dos so extremely depress them But the grossest of his follies is yet more pardonable than his detestable fraud in falsifying Bracton's words and leaving out such as are not for his purpose which shew his meaning to be directly contrary to the sense put upon them That this may appear I shall set down the words as they are found in Bracton Ipse autem Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo sub Lege quia Lex facit Regem Attribuat ergo Rex Legi quod Lex attribuit ei id est dominationem potestatem Non est enim Rex ubi dominatur volunt as non Lex quod sub Lege esse debeat cum sit Dei vicarius evidenter apparet If Bracton therefore be a competent Judg the King is under the Law and he is not a King nor God's Vicegerent unless he be so and we all know how to proceed with those who being under the Law offend against it For the Law is not made in vain In this case something more is to be done than petitioning and 't is ridiculous to say that if he will not amend 't is punishment enough for him to expect God an Avenger for the same may be said of all Malefactors God can sufficiently punish Thieves and Murderers but the future Judgment of which perhaps they have no belief is not sufficient to restrain them from committing more Crimes nor to deter others from following their example God was always able to punish Murderers but yet by his Law he commands man to shed the blood of him who should shed man's blood and declares that the Land cannot be purged of the Guilt by any other means He had Judgments in store for Jeroboam Ahab and those that were like them but yet he commanded that according to that Law their Houses should be destroy'd from the earth The dogs lick'd up the blood of Ahab where they had licked that of Naboth and eat Jezebel who had contrived his murder But says our Author we must not look into his deeds much less oppose them Must not David look into Saul's deeds nor oppose them Why did he then bring together as many men as he could to oppose and make foreign Alliances against him even with the Moabites and the accursed Philistins Why did Jehu not only destroy Ahab's house but kill the King of Judah and his forty Brothers only for going to visit his Children Our Author may perhaps say because God commanded them But if God commanded them to do so he did not command them and all mankind not to do so and if he did not forbid they have nothing to restrain them from
must submit Contests will in the like manner arise concerning successions to Crowns how exactly soever they be disposed by Law For tho every one will say that the next ought to succeed yet no man knows who is the next which is too much verified by the bloody decisions of such disputes in many parts of the world and he that says the next in blood is actually King makes all questions thereupon arising impossible to be otherwise determined than by the Sword the pretender to the right being placed above the judgment of man and the Subjects for any thing I know obliged to believe serve and obey him if he says he has it For otherwise if either every man in particular or all together have a right of judging his title it can be of no value till it be adjudged I confess that the Law of France by the utter exclusion of Females and their descendents dos obviate many dangerous and inextricable difficulties but others remain which are sufficient to subvert all the Polity of that Kingdom if there be not a power of judging them and there can be none if it be true that Le mort saisit le vif Not to trouble my self with seigned cases that of Legitimation alone will suffice 'T is not enough to say that the Children born under marriage are to be reputed legitimate for not only several Children born of Joan Daughter to the King of Portugal Wife to Henry the Fourth of Castille during the time of their Marriage were utterly rejected as begotten in Adultery but also her Daughter Joan whom the King during his life and at the hour of his death acknowledged to have bin begotten by him and the only Title that Isabel who was married to Ferdinand of Arragon had to the Crown of Spain was derived from their rejection It would be tedious and might give offence to many great Persons if I should relate all the dubious cases that have bin or still remain in the World touching matters of this nature but the Lawyers of all Nations will testify that hardly any one point comes before them which affords a greater number of difficult Cases than that of Marriages and the Legitimation of Children upon them and Nations must be involved in the most inextricable difficulties if there be not a power somewhere to decide them which cannot be if there be no intermission and that the next in blood that is he who says he is the next be immediately invested with the right and power But surely no people has bin so careless of their most important Concernments to leave them in such uncertainty and simply to depend upon the humour of a man or the faith of women who besides their other Frailties have bin often accused of supposititious Births and mens passions are known to be so violent in relation to Women they love or hate that none can safely be trusted with those Judgments The virtue of the best would be exposed to a temptation that flesh and blood can hardly resist and such as are less perfect would follow no other rule than the blind impulse of the passion that for the present reigns in them There must therefore be a judg of such disputes as may in these cases arise in every Kingdom and tho 't is not my business to determine who is that judg in all places yet I may justly say that in England it is the Parliament If no inferiour Authority could debar Ignotus Son to the Lady Rosse born under the Protection from the inheritance of a private Family none can certainly assume a power of disposing of the Crown upon any occasion No Authority but that of the Parliament could legitimate the Children of Catherine Swinford with a proviso not to extend to the inheritance of the Crown Others might say if they were lawfully begotten they ought to inherit every thing and nothing if they were not But the Parliament knew how to limit a particular favour and prevent it from extending to a publick mischief Henry the Eighth took an expeditious way of obviating part of the Controversies that might arise from the multitude of his Wives by cutting off the heads of some as soon as he was weary of them or had a mind to take another but having bin hinder'd from dealing in the same manner with Catherine by the greatness of her birth and kindred he left such as the Parliament only could resolve And no less power would ever have thought of making Mary and Elizabeth capable of the succession when according to ordinary rules one of them must have bin a Bastard and it had bin absurd to say that both of them were immediately upon the death of their Predecessors possess'd of the Crown if an Act of Parliament had not conferred the right upon them which they could not have by birth But the Kings and Princes of England have not bin of a temper different from those of other Nations and many Examples may be brought of the like occasions of dispute happening every where and the like will probably be for ever which must necessarily introduce the most mischievous confusions and expose the Titles which as is pretended are to be esteemed most sacred to be overthrown by violence and fraud if there be not in all places a Power of deciding the controversies that arise from the uncertainty of Titles according to the respective Laws of every Nation upon which they are grounded No man can be thought to have a just Title till it be so adjudged by that power This judgment is the first step to the Throne The Oath taken by the King obliges him to observe the Laws of his Country and that concerning the succession being one of the principal he is obliged to keep that part as well as any other SECT XIX The greatest Enemy of a just Magistrate is he who endeavours to invalidate the Contract between him and the People or to corrupt their Manners 'T Is not only from Religion but from the Law of Nature that we learn the necessity of standing to the agreements we make and he who departs from the principle written in the hearts of men Pactis standum seems to degenerate into a beast Such as had virtue tho without true religion could tell us as a brave and excellent Grecian did that it was not necessary for him to live but it was necessary to preserve his Heart from deceit and his Tongue from falshood The Roman Satyrist carries the same Notion to a great height and affirms that tho the worst of Tyrants should command a man to be false and persar'd and back his injunction with the utmost of Torments he ought to prefer his integrity before his life And tho Filmer may be excused if he often mistake in matters of Theology yet his Inclinations to Rome which he prefers before Geneva might have led him to the Principles in which the honest Romans lived if he had not observed that such Principles as make men
Sons of Vespasian and Constantine inherited the Roman Empire tho their Fathers had no such title but gaining the Empire by violence which Hooker says is meer Tyranny that can create no right they could devolve none to their Children The Kings of France of the three races have inherited the Crown but Meroveus Pepin and Hugh Capet could neither pretend title nor conquest or any other Right than what was conferred upon them by the Clergy Nobility and People and consequently whatsoever is inherited from them can have no other Original for that is the gift of the People which is bestowed upon the first under whom the Successors claim as if it had bin by a peculiar Act given to every one of them It will be more hard to shew how the Crown of England is become hereditary unless it be by the Will of the People for tho it were granted that some of the Saxon Kings came in by inheritance which I do not having as I think proved them to have bin absolutely elective yet William the Norman did not for he was a Bastard and could inherit nothing William Rufus and Henry did not for their elder Brother Robert by right of inheritance ought to have bin preferred before them Stephen and Henry the second did not for Maud the only Heiress of Henry the first was living when both were crowned Richard John and those who followed did not for they were Bastards born in adultery They must therefore have received their Right from the People or they could have none at all and their Successors fall under the same condition Moreover I find great variety in the deduction of this hereditary Right In Sparta there were two Kings of different Families endowed with an equal power If the Heraclidae did reign as Fathers of the People the AEacidae did not if the right was in the AEacidae the Heraclidae could have none for 't is equally impossible to have two Fathers as two thousand 'T is in vain to say that two Families joined and agreed to reign jointly for 't is evident the Spartans had Kings before the time of Hercules or Achilles who were the Fathers of the two Races If it be said that the regal power with which they were invested did entitle them to the right of Fathers it must in like manner have belonged to the Roman Consuls Military Tribunes Dictators and Pretors for they had more Power than the Spartan Kings and that glorious Nation might change their Fathers every year and multiply or diminish the number of them as they pleased If this be most ridiculous and absurd 't is certain that the Name and Office of King Consul Dictator or the like dos not confer any determined Right upon the Person that hath it Every one has a right to that which is allotted to him by the Laws of the Country by which he is created As the Persians Spartans Romans or Germans might make such Magistrates and under such names as best pleased themselves and accordingly enlarge or diminish their Power the same Right belongs to all Nations and the Rights due unto as well as the Duties incumbent upon every one are to be known only by the Laws of that place This may seem strange to those who know neither Books nor Things Histories nor Laws but is well explain'd by Grotius who denying the Soveraign Power to be annexed to any Man speaks of divers Magistrates under several names that had and others that under the same names had it not and distinguishes those who have the Summum Imperium summo modo from those who have it modo non summo and tho probably he looked upon the first sort as a thing meerly speculative if by that summo modo a right of doing what one pleases be understood yet he gives many Examples of the other and among those who had liberrimum imperium if any had it he names the Kings of the Sabeans who nevertheless were under such a condition that tho they were as Agatharchidas reports obeyed in all things whilst they continued within the Walls of their Palace might be stoned by any that met them without it He finds also another obstacle to the Absolute power Cum Rex partem habeat summi Imperii partem Senatus sive Populus which parts are proportioned according to the Laws of each Kingdom whether Hereditary or Elective both being equally regulated by them The Law that gives and measures the Power prescribes Rules how it should be transmitted In some places the supreme Magistrates are annually elected in others their Power is for life in some they are meerly elective in others hereditary under certain Rules or Limitations The antient Kingdoms and Lordships of Spain were hereditary but the Succession went ordinarily to the eldest of the reigning Family not to the nearest in Blood This was the ground of the Quarrel between Corbis the Brother and Orsua the Son of the last Prince decided by Combat before Scipio I know not whether the Goths brought that custom with them when they conquered Spain or whether they learnt it from the Inhabitants but certain it is that keeping themselves to the Families of the Balthei and Amalthei they had more regard to Age than Proximity and almost ever preferred the Brother or eldest Kinsman of the last King before his Son The like custom was in use among the Moors in Spain and Africa who according to the several Changes that happened among the Families of Almohades Almoranides and Benemerini did always take one of the reigning Blood but in the choice of him had most respect to Age and Capacity This is usually called the Law of Thanestry and as in many other places prevailed also in Ireland till that Country fell under the English Government In France and Turky the Male that is nearest in Blood succeeds and I do not know of any deviation from that Rule in France since Henry the First was preferred before Robert his elder Brother Grandchild to Hugh Capet but notwithstanding the great veneration they have for the Royal Blood they utterly exclude Females lest the Crown should fall to a Stranger or a Woman that is seldom able to govern her self should come to govern so great a People Some Nations admit Females either simply as well as Males or under a condition of not marrying out of their Country or without the consent of the Estates with an absolute exclusion of them and their Children if they do according to which Law now in force among the Swedes Charles Gustavus was chosen King upon the resignation of Queen Christina as having no Title and the Crown setled upon the Heirs of his Body to the utter exclusion of his Brother Adolphus their Mother having married a German Tho divers Nations have differently disposed their Affairs all those that are not naturally Slaves and like to Beasts have preferred their own Good before the personal Interests of him that expects the Crown so as upon no pretence
against them and placed the only hopes of their safety in the publick Calamity and lawful Kings when they have fallen into the first degree of madness so as to assume a power above that which was allowed by the Law have in fury proved equal to the worst Usurpers Clonymus of Sparta was of this sort He became says Plutarch an Enemy to the City because they would not allow him the absolute Power he affected and brought Pyrrhus the fiercest of their Enemies with a mighty and excellently well disciplin'd Army to destroy them Vortigern the Britan call'd in the Saxons with the ruin of his own People who were incensed against him for his Lewdness Cruelty and Baseness King John for the like reasons offer'd the Kingdom of England to the Moors and to the Pope Peter the Cruel and other Kings of Castille brought vast Armies of Moors into Spain to the ruin of their own People who detested their Vices and would not part with their Privileges Many other examples of the like nature might be alledged and I wish our own experience did not too well prove that such designs are common Let him that doubts this examin the Causes of the Wars with Scotland in the Years 1639 1640 the slaughters of the Protestants in Ireland 1641 the whole course of Alliances and Treaties for the space of fourscore Years the friendship contracted with the French frequent Quarrels with the Dutch together with other circumstances that are already made too publick if he be not convinced by this he may soon see a man in the Throne who had rather be a Tributary to France than a lawful King of England whilst either Parliament or People shall dare to dispute his Commands insist upon their own Rights or defend a Religion inconsistent with that which he has espoused and then the truth will be so evident as to require no proof Grotius was never accused of dealing hardly with Kings or laying too much weight upon imaginary cases nevertheless amongst other reasons that in his opinion justify Subjects in taking arms against their Princes he alledges this propter immanem saevitiam and quando Rex in Populi exitium fertur in as much as it is contrary to and inconsistent with the ends for which Governments are instituted which were most impertinent if no such thing could be for that which is not can have no effect There are therefore Princes who seek the destruction of their People or none could be justly opposed on that account If King James was of another opinion I could wish the course of his Government had bin suted to it When he said that whilst he had the power of making Judges and Bishops he would make that to be Law and Gospel which best pleased him and filled those places with such as turned both according to his Will and Interests I must think that by overthrowing Justice which is the rule of civil and moral Actions and perverting the Gospel which is the light of the spiritual man he left nothing unattempted that he durst attempt by which he might bring the most extensive and universal evils upon our Nation that any can suffer This would stand good tho Princes never erred unless they were transported with some inordinate Lusts for 't is hard to find one that dos not live in the perpetual power of them They are naturally subject to the impulse of such appetites as well as others and whatever evil reigns in their nature is fomented by education 'T is the handle by which their Flatterers lead them and he that discovers to what Vice a Prince is most inclin'd is sure to govern him by rendring himself subservient In this consists the chief art of a Courtier and by this means it comes to pass that such Lusts as in private men are curbed by fear do not only rage as in a wild Beast but are perpetually inflamed by the malice of their own Servants their hatred to the Laws of God or Men that might restrain them increases in proportion with their Vices or their fears of being punished for them And when they are come to this they can set no limits to their fury and there is no extravagance into which they do not frequently fall But many of them do not expect these violent motives the perversity of their own nature carries them to the extremities of evil They hate Virtue for its own sake and virtuous men for being most unlike to themselves This Virtue is the dictate of Reason or the remains of Divine Light by which men are made beneficent and beneficial to each other Religion proceeds from the same spring and tends to the same end and the good of Mankind so intirely depends upon these two that no people ever enjoyed any thing worth desiring that was not the product of them and whatsoever any have suffer'd that deserves to be abhorr'd and feared has proceeded either from the defect of these or the wrath of God against them If any Prince therefore has bin an enemy to Virtue and Religion he must also have bin an enemy to Mankind and most especially to the People under him Whatsoever he dos against those that excel in Virtue and Religion tends to the destruction of the People who subsist by them I will not take upon me to define who they are or to tell the number of those that do this but 't is certain there have bin such and I wish I could say they were few in number or that they had liv'd only in past ages Tacitus dos not fix this upon one Prince but upon all that he writes of and to give his Readers a tast of what he was to write he says that Nobility and Honours were dangerous but that Virtue brought most certain destruction and in another place that after the slaughter of many excellent men Nero resolved to cut down Virtue it self and therefore kill'd Thraseas Patus and Bareas Soranus And whosoever examines the Christian or Ecclesiastical Histories will find those Princes to have bin no less enemies to Virtue and Religion than their Predecessors and consequently enemies to the Nations under them unless Religion and Virtue be things prejudicial or indifferent to Mankind But our Author may say these were particular cases and so was the slaughter of the Prophets and Apostles the crucifixion of Christ and all the Villanies that have ever bin committed yet they proceeded from a universal principle of hatred to all that is good exerting it self as far as it could to the ruin of mankind And nothing but the over-ruling Power of God who resolved to preserve to himself a People could set bounds to their Rage which in other respects had as full success as our Author or the Devil could have wished Dionysius his other example of Justice deserves observation More falshood lewdness treachery ingratitude cruelty baseness avarice impudence and hatred to all manner of Good was hardly ever known in a mortal Creature For this reason
from a foreign Country was immediately made King of a fierce People that had already conquer'd many of their Neighbours and was grown too boisterous even for Romulus himself The like may be said of the first Tarquin and of Servius they were Strangers and tho Tullus Hostilius and Ancus Martius were Romans they had as little title to a Dominion over their Fellow-Citizens or means of attaining to it as if they had come from the farthest parts of the Earth This must be in all places unless one man could prove by a perfect and uninterrupted Genealogy that he is the eldest Son of the eldest Line of Noah and that Line to have continued perpetually in the Government of the World for if the Power has bin divided it may be subdivided into infinity if interrupted the chain is broken and can never be made whole But if our Author can perform this for the service of any man I willingly surrender my Arms and yield up the Cause I defend If he fail 't is ridiculous to pretend a Right that belongs to no man or to go about to retrieve a Right which for the space of four thousand years has lain dorment and much more to create that which never had a subsistence This leads us necessarily to a conclusion That all Kingdoms are at the first erected by the consent of Nations and given to whom they please or else all are set up by force or some by force and some by consent If any are set up by the consent of Nations those Kings do not confer Liberties upon those Nations but receive all from them and the general Proposition is false If our Author therefore or his Followers would confute me they must prove that all the Kingdoms of the World have their beginning from force and that Force doth always create a Right or if they recede from the general Proposition and attribute a peculiar right to one or more Princes vvho are so absolute Lords of their People that those under them have neither Liberty Privilege Property or Part in the Government but by their Concessions they must prove that those Princes did by force gain the Power they have and that their Right is derived from it This force also must have bin perpetually continued for if that force be the root of the Right that is pretended another force by the same rule may overturn extinguish or transfer it to another hand If Contracts have interven'd the force ceases and the Right that afterwards doth accrue to the persons must proceed from and be regulated according to those Contracts This may be sufficient to my purpose For as it has bin already proved that the Kingdoms of Israel Judah Rome Sparta France Spain England and all that we are concerned in or that deserve to be examples to us did arise from the Consent of the respective Nations and were frequently reduced to their first Principles when the Princes have endeavour'd to transgress the Laws of their Institution it could be nothing to us tho Attila or Tamerlan had by force gained the Dominions they possess'd But I dare go a step further and boldly assert that there never was or can be a man in the world that did or can subdue a Nation and that the right of one grounded upon force is a meer whimsey It was not Agathocles Dionysius Nabis Marius Sylla or Cesar but the mercenary Soldiers and other Villains that joined with them who subdued the Syracusans Spartans or Romans And as the work was not performed by those Tyrants alone if a right had bin gained by the violence they used it must have bin common to all those that gained it and he that commanded them could have had no more than they thought fit to confer upon him When Miltiades desired leave to wear an Olive Garland in commemoration of the Victory obtained at Marathon and Athenian did in my opinion rightly say If you alone did fight against the Persians it is just that you only should be crowned but if others did participate in the Victory they ought also to have a part in the Honour And the principal difference that I have observ'd between the most regular proceedings of the wisest Senats or Assemblies of the people in their Persons or Delegates and the fury of the most dissolute Villains has bin that the first seeking the publick good do usually set up such a Man and invest him with such Powers as seem most conducing to that Good whereas the others following the impulse of a bestial rage and aiming at nothing but the satisfaction of their own lusts always advance one from whom they expect the greatest advantages to themselves and give him such Powers as most conduce to the accomplishment of their own ends but as to the Person 't is the same thing Cesar and Nero did no more make themselves what they were than Numa and could no more confer any Right Liberty or Privilege upon the Army that gave them all they had than the most regular Magistrate can upon the Senat or People that chose them This also is common to the worst as well as the best that they who set up either do as into a publick Treasury confer upon the Person they chuse a Power of distributing to particular men or numbers of men such Honors Privileges and Advantages as they may seem according to the Principles of the Government to deserve But there is this difference that the ends of the one being good and those of the other evil the first do for the most part limit the Powers that something may remain to reward Services done to the Publick in a manner proportion'd to the merit of every one placing other Magistrates to see it really performed so as they may not by the weakness or vices of the Governor be turned to the publick detriment the others think they never give enough that the Prince having all in his power may be able to gratify their most exorbitant desires if by any ways they can get his favour and his infirmities and vices being most beneficial to them they seldom allow to any other Magistrate a power of opposing his Will or suffer those who for the publick good would assume it The World affords many examples of both sorts and every one of them have had their progress sutable to their Constitution The regular Kingdoms of England France Spain Poland Bohemia Denmark Sweden and others whether elective or hereditary have had High Stewards Constables Mayors of the Palace Rixhofmeisters Parliaments Diets Assemblies of Estates Cortez and the like by which those have bin admitted to succeed who seemed most fit for the publick Service the unworthy have bin rejected the infirmities of the weak supplied the malice of the unjust restrained and when necessity required the Crown transferr'd from one Line or Family to another But in the furious Tyrannies that have bin set up by the violence of a corrupted Soldiery as in the antient Roman Empire the
which they are condemned perpetually to the Gallies and such as are aiding to them to grievous Fines But before this be acknowledged to have any similitude or relation to our discourse concerning Kings it must be proved that the present King or those under whom he claims is or were Proprietors of all the Lands in England and granted the several parcels under the condition of suffering patiently such Inconveniences and Miseries as are above-mentioned or that they who did confer the Crown upon any of them did also give a Propriety in the Land which I do not find in any of the fifteen or sixteen Titles that have bin since the coming in of the Normans and if it was not done to the first of every one it cannot accrue to the others unless by some new act to the same purpose which will not easily be produced It will be no less difficult to prove that any thing unworthy of freemen is by any Tenures imposed in England unless it be the offering up of the Wives and Daughters of Tenants to the Lust of Abbots and Monks and they are so far from being willingly suffer'd that since the Dens and Nurseries of those Beasts were abolished no man that succeeds them has had impudence sufficient to exact the performance and tho the letter of the Law may favour them the turpitude of the thing has extinguished the usage But even the Kings of Israel and Judah who brought upon the People those evils that had bin foretold by Samuel did not think they had a right to the Powers they exercised If the Law had given a right to Ahab to take the best of their Vineyards he might without ceremony have taken that of Naboth and by the majestick power of an absolute Monarch have chastized the churlish Clown who resused to sell or change it for another but for want of it he was obliged to take a very different course If the lives of Subjects had in the like manner depended upon the will of Kings David might without scruple have killed Vriah rather than to place him in the front of the Army that he might fall by his own courage The malice and treachery of such Proceedings argues a defect of power and he that acts in such an oblique manner shews that his actions are not warranted by the Law which is boldly executed in the face of the Sun This shews the interpretation put upon the words Against thee only have I sinned by Court-flatterers to be false If he had not sinned against Bathsheba whom he corrupted Vriah whom he caused to be killed the People that he scandalized and the Law which he violated he had never endeavoured to cover his guilt by so vile a sraud And as he did not thereby fly the sight of God but of men 't is evident that he in that action feared men more than God If by the Examples of Israel and Judah we may judg whether the Inconveniences and Miseries brought upon Nations by their Kings be tolerable or intolerable it will be enough to consider the madness of Sauls cruelty towards his Subjects and the slaughter brought upon them by the hand of the Philistins on Mount Gilboa where he fell with the flower of all Israel the Civil Wars that hapned in the time of David and the Plague brought upon the People by his wickedness the heavy burdens laid upon them by Solomon and the Idolatry favour'd by him the wretched folly of Rehoboam and the defection of the ten Tribes caused by it the Idolatry established by Jeroboam and the Kings of Israel and that of many of those of Judah also the frequent Wars and unheard of Slaughters ensuing thereupon between the Tribes the daily devastations of the Country by all sorts of Strangers the murders of the Prophets the abolition of God's Worship the desolation of Towns and Provinces the Captivity of the ten Tribes carried away into unknown Countries and in the end the abolition of both Kingdoms with the captivity of the Tribe of Judah and the utter destruction of the City It cannot be said that these things were suffer'd under Kings and not from or by them for the desolation of the Cities People and Country is in many places of Scripture imputed to the Kings that taught Israel to sin as appears by what was denounced against Jeroboam Jehu Ahaz Manasseh Zedekiah and others Nay the Captivity of Babylon with the evils ensuing were first announced to Hezekiah for his vanity and Josiah by the like brought a great slaughter upon himself and people But if mischiess fell upon the People by the frailty of these who after David were the best nothing surely less than the utmost of all Miseries could be expected from such as were set to do evil and to make the Nation like to themselves in which they met with too great success If it be pretended that God's People living under an extraordinary Dispensation can be no example to us I desire other Histories may be examined for I confess I know no Nation so great happy and prosperous nor any Power so well established that two or three ill Kings immediately succeeding each other have not bin able to destroy and bring to such a condition that it appeared the Nations must perish unless the Senates Diets and other Assemblies of State had put a stop to the mischief by restraining or deposing them and tho this might be proved by innumerable Testimonies I shall content my self with that of the Roman Empire which perished by the vices corruption and baseness of their Princes the noble Kingdom of the Goths in Spain overthrown by the Tyranny of Witza and Rodrigo the present state of Spain now languishing and threatning ruin from the same causes France brought to the last degree of misery and weakness by the degenerate races of Pharamond and Charles preserved and restored by the Virtues of Pepin and Capet to which may be added those of our own Country which are so well known that I need not mention them SECT VI. 'T is not good for such Nations as will have Kings to suffer them to be glorious powerful or abounding in Riches OUR Author having hitherto spoken of all Nations as born under a necessity of being subject to Absolute Monarchy which he pretends to have bin set up by the universal and indispensible Law of God and Nature now seems to leave to their discretion whether they will have a King or not but says that those who will have a King are bound to allow him Royal maintenance by providing Revenues for the Crown since it is for the Honour Profit and Safety of the People to have their King glorious powerful and abounding in Riches If there be any thing of sense in this Clause there is nothing of truth in the foundation or principle of his whole Book For as the right and being of a Father is natural or inherent and no ways depending upon the will of the Child that of a
Kings of Spain France and Sweden so well to understand the meaning of it as to decide extraordinary cases The wisdom of Nations has provided more assured helps and none could have bin so brutish and negligent of the publick Concernments to suffer the Succession to fall to women children c. if they had not reserved a power in themselves to prefer others before the nearest in blood if reason require and prescribed such rules as might preserve the publick from ruin notwithstanding their infirmities and vices These helps provided by our Laws are principally by grand and petit Juries who are not only Judges of matters of fact as whether a man be kill'd but whether he be kill'd criminally These men are upon their Oaths and may be indicted of Perjury if they prevaricate The Judges are present not only to be a check upon them but to explain such points of the Law as may seem difficult And tho these Judges may be said in some sense to be chosen by the King he is not understood to do it otherwise than by the advice of his Council who cannot perform their duty unless they propose such as in their consciences they think most worthy of the Office and most capable of performing the duty rightly nor he accomplish the Oath of his Coronation unless he admit those who upon deliberation seem to be the best The Judges being thus chosen are so far from depending upon the will of the King that they swear faithfully to serve the People as well as the King and to do justice to every man according to the Law of the Land notwithstanding any Writs Letters or Commands received from him and in default thereof they are to forfeit their bodies lands and goods as in cases of Treason These Laws have bin so often and so severely executed that it concerns all Judges well to consider them and the Cases of Tresilian Empson Dudley and others shew that neither the King 's preceding command nor subsequent pardon could preserve them from the punishment they deserved All men knew that what they did was agreeable to the King's pleasure for Tresilian advanced the Prerogative of Edward the 2d and Empson brought great Treasures into the Coffers of Henry the 7th Nevertheless they were charged with Treason for subverting the Laws of the Land and executed as Traitors Tho England ought never to forget the happy Reign of Q. Elizabeth yet it must be acknowledged that she as well as others had her failings She was full of love to the People just in her nature sincere in her intentions but could not so perfectly discover the snares that were laid for her or resist the importunity of the Persons she most trusted as not sometimes to be brought to attempt things against Law She and her Counsellors pressed the Judges very hardly to obey the Patent under her Great Seal in the case of Cavendish but they answered That both she and they had taken an Oath to keep the Law and if they should obey her commands the Law would not warrant them c. And besides the offence against God their Country and the Commonwealth they alledged the example of Empson and Dudley whereby they said they were deterred from obeying her illegal Commands They who had sworn to keep the Law notwithstanding the King's Writs knew that the Law depended not upon his will and the same Oath that obliged them not to regard any command they should receive from him shewed that they were not to expect indemnity by it and not only that the King had neither the power of making altering mitigating or interpreting the Law but that he was not at all to be heard in general or particular matters otherwise than as he speaks in the common course of Justice by the Courts legally established which say the same thing whether he be young or old ignorant or wise wicked or good and nothing dos better evidence the wisdom and care of our Ancestors in framing the Laws and Government we live under than that the People did not suffer extremities by the vices or infirmities of Kings till an Age more full of malice than those in which they lived had found tricks to pervert the rule and frustrate their honest intentions It was not safe for the Kings to violate their Oaths by an undue interposition of their Authority but the Ministers who served them in those violations have seldom escaped punishment This is to be understood when the deviations from Justice are extreme and mischievous for something must always be allow'd to human frailty The best have their defects and none could stand if a too exact scrutiny were made of all their actions Edward the third about the twentieth year of his Reign acknowledged his own in Parliament and as well for the ease of his Conscience as the satisfaction of his People promoted an Act Commanding all Judges to do Justice notwithstanding any Writs Letters or Commands from himself and forbidding those that belonged to the King Queen and Prince to intermeddle in those matters But if the best and wisest of our Princes in the strength and maturity of their years had their failings and every act proceeding from them that tended to the interruption of Justice was a failing how can it be said that the King in his personal capacity directly or indirectly may enter into the discussion of these matters much less to determine them according to his will But says our Author the Law is no better than a Tyrant general Pardons at the Coronation and in Parliament are but the bounty of the Prerogative c. There may be hard cases and citing some perverted pieces from Aristotle's Ethicks and Politicsk adds That when something falls out besides the general rule then it is fit that what the Lawmaker hath omitted or where he hath erred by speaking generally it should be corrected and supplied as if the Lawmaker were present that ordained it The Governor whether he be one man or more ought to be Lord of these things whereof it was impossible that the Law should speak exactly These things are in part true but our Author makes use of them as the Devil dos of Scripture to subvert the truth There may be something of rigour in the Law that in some cases may be mitigated and the Law it self in relation to England dos so far acknowledg it as to refer much to the consciences of Juries and those who are appointed to assist them and the most difficult Cases are referred to the Parliament as the only judges that are able to determine them Thus the Statute of the 35 Edw. 3d enumerating the crimes then declared to be Treason leaves to suture Parliaments to judg what other facts equivalent to them may deserve the same punishment and 't is a general rule in the Law which the Judges are sworn to observe that difficult Cases should be reserved till the Parliament meet who are only able to decide them and
if there be any inconvenience in this 't is because they do not meet so frequently as the Law requires or by sinister means are interrupted in their sitting But nothing can be more absurd than to say that because the King dos not call Parliaments as the Law and his Oath requires that power should accrue to him which the Law and the consent of the Nation has placed in them There is also such a thing in the Law as a general or particular Pardon and the King may in some degree be entrusted with the power of giving it especially for such crimes as merely relate to himself as every man may remit the injuries done to himself but the confession of Edward the third That the Oath of the Crown had not bin kept by reason of the grant of Pardons contrary to Statutes and a new Act made that all such Charters of Pardon from henceforth granted against the Oath of the Crown and the said Statutes should be held for none demonstrates that this power was not in himself but granted by the Nation and to be executed according to such rules as the Law prescribed and the Parliament approved Moreover there having bin many and sometimes bloody contests for the Crown upon which the Nation was almost equally divided and it being difficult for them to know or even for us who have all the parties before us to judg which was the better side it was understood that he who came to be crown'd by the consent of the People was acceptable to all and the question being determined it was no way fit that he should have a liberty to make use of the publick Authority then in his hands to revenge such personal iniuries as he had or might suppose to have received which might raise new and perhaps more dangerous troubles if the Authors of them were still kept in fear of being prosecuted and nothing could be more unreasonable than that he should emplov his power to the destruction of those who had consented to make him King This made it a matter of course for a King as soon as he was crown'd to issue out a general Pardon which was no more than to declare that being now what he was not before he had no enemy upon any former account For this reason Lewis the twelfth of France when he was incited to revenge himself against those who in the reign of his Predecessor Charles the eighth had caused him to be imprisoned with great danger of his life made this answer That the King of France did not care to revenge the injuries done to the Duke of Orleans and the last King of Sweden seemed no otherwise to remember who had opposed the Queens Abdication and his Election than by conferring honours upon them because he knew they were the best men of the Nation and such as would be his friends when they should see how he would govern in which he was not deceived But lest all those who might come to the Crown of England should not have the same prudence and generosity the Kings were obliged by a Custom of no less force than a Law immediately to put an end to all disputes and the inconveniences that might arise from them This did not proceed from the bounty of the Prerogative which I think is nonsense for tho he that enjoys the Prerogative may have bounty the Prerogative can have none but from common sense from his obligation and the care of his own safety and could have no other effect in Law than what related to his person as appears by the forementioned Statute Pardon 's granted by Act of Parliament are of another nature For as the King who has no other power than by Law can no otherwise dispense with the crimes committed against the Laws than the Law dos enable him the Parliament that has the power of making Laws may intirely abolish the crimes and unquestionably remit the punishment as they please Tho some words of Aristotle's Ethicks are without any coherence shuffled together by our Author with others taken out of his Politicks I do not much except against them No Law made by man can be perfect and there must be in every Nation a power of correcting such defects as in time may arise or be discovered This power can never be so rightly placed as in the same hand that has the right of making Laws whether in one person or in many If Filmer therefore can tell us of a place where one man woman or child however he or she be qualified has the power of making Laws I will acknowledg that not only the hard Cases but as many others as he pleases are referr'd to his or her judgment and that they may give it whether they have any understanding of what they do or not whether they be drunk or sober in their senses or stark mad But as I know no such place and should not be much concerned for the sufferings of a People that should bring such misery upon themselves as must accompany an absolute dependence upon the unruly will of such a creature I may leave him to seek it and rest in a perfect assurance that he dos not speak of England which acknowledges no other Law than its own and instead of receiving any from Kings dos to this day obey none but such as have bin made by our Ancestors or our selves and never admitted any King that did not swear to observe them And if Aristotle deserve credit the power of altering mitigating explaining or correcting the Laws of England is only in the Parliament because none but the Parliament can make them SECT XXIII Aristotle proves that no man is to be entrusted with an absolute Power by shewing that no one knows how to execute it but such a man as is not to be found OUR Author having falsly cited and perverted the sense of Aristotle now brings him in saying That a perfect Kingdom is that wherein the King rules all according to his own will But tho I have read his books of Government with some attention I can find no such thing in them unless the word which signifies mere or absolute may be justly translated into perfect which is so far from Aristotle's meaning that he distinguishes the absolute or despotical Kingdoms from the Legitimate and commending the latter gives no better name than that of barbarous to the first which he says can agree only with the nature of such Nations as are base and stupid little differing from Beasts and having no skill to govern or courage to defend themselves must resign all to the will of one that will take care of them Yet even this cannot be done unless he that should take that care be wholly exempted from the vices which oblige the others to stand in need of it for otherwise 't is no better than if a Sheep should undertake to govern Sheep or a Hog to command Swine Aristotle plainly saying That as men are by nature
ready to use it and their extravagances having bin often chastised by Law sufficiently proves that their power is not derived from a higher original than the Law of their own Countries If it were true that the answer sometimes given by Kings to Bills presented for their Assent did as our Author says amount to a denial it could only shew that they have a negative voice upon that which is agreed by the Parliament and is far from a power of acting by themselves being only a check upon the other parts of the Government But indeed it is no more than an elusion and he that dos by art obliquely elude confesses he has not a right absolutely to refuse 'T is natural to Kings especially to the worst to scrue up their Authority to the height and nothing can more evidently prove the defect of it than the necessity of having recourse to such pitiful evasions when they are unwilling to do that which is required But if I should grant that the words import a denial and that notwithstanding those of the Coronation Oath Quas vulgus elegerit they might deny no more could be inferred from thence than that they are entrusted with a power equal in that point to that of either House and cannot be supreme in our Author's sense unless there were in the same State at the same time three distinct supreme and absolute Powers which is absurd His cases relating to the proceedings of the Star-Chamber and Council-Table do only prove that some Kings have encroached upon the rights of the Nation and bin suffer'd till their excesses growing to be extreme they turn'd to the ruin of the Ministers that advised them and sometimes of the Kings themselves But the jurisdiction of the Council having bin regulated by the Statute of the 17 Car. 1. and the Star-Chamber more lately abolished they are nothing to our dispute Such as our Author usually impute to treason and rebellion the changes that upon such occasions have ensued but all impartial men do not only justify them but acknowledg that all the Crowns of Europe are at this day enjoy'd by no other title than such acts solemnly performed by the respective Nations who either disliking the person that pretended to the Crown tho next in blood or the government of the present possessor have thought fit to prefer another person or family They also say that as no Government can be so perfect but some defect may be originally in it or afterwards introduced none can subsist unless they be from time to time reduced to their first integrity by such an exertion of the power of those for whose sake they were instituted as may plainly shew them to be subject to no power under Heaven but may do whatever appears to be for their own good And as the safety of all Nations consists in rightly placing and measuring this power such have bin found always to prosper who have given it to those from whom usurpations were least to be feared who have bin least subject to be awed cheated or corrupted and who having the greatest interest in the Nation were most concerned to preserve its power liberty and welfare This is the greatest trust that can be reposed in men This power was by the Spartans given to the Ephori and the Senat of twenty eight in Venice to that which they call Concilio de Pregadi in Germany Spain France Sweedland Denmark Poland Hungary Bohemia Scotland England and generally all the Nations that have lived under the Gothick Polity it has bin in their General Assemblies under the names of Diets Cortez Parliaments Senats and the like But in what hands soever it is the power of making abrogating changing correcting and interpreting Laws has bin in the same Kings have bin rejected or deposed the Succession of the Crown settled regulated or changed and I defy any man to shew me one King amongst all the Nations abovementioned that has any right to the Crown he wears unless such acts are good If this power be not well placed or rightly proportioned to that which is given to other Magistrates the State must necessarily fall into great disorders or the most violent and dangerous means must be frequently used to preserve their Liberty Sparta and Venice have rarely bin put to that trouble because the Senats were so much above the Kings and Dukes in power that they could without difficulty bring them to reason The Gothick Kings in Spain never ventur'd to dispute with the Nobility and Witza and Rodrigo exposed the Kingdom as a prey to the Moors rather by weakning it through the neglect of Military discipline joined to their own ignorance and cowardice and by evil example bringing the youth to resemble them in lewdness and baseness than by establishing in themselves a power above the Law But in England our Ancestors who seem to have had some such thing in their eye as balancing the powers by a fatal mistake placed usually so much in the hands of the King that whensoever he happened to be bad his extravagances could not be repress'd without great danger And as this has in several ages cost the Nation a vast proportion of generous blood so 't is the cause of our present difficulties and threatens us with more but can never deprive us of the rights we inherit from our fathers SECT XXVIII The English Nation has always bin governed by it self or its Representatives HAVING proved that the People of England have never acknowledged any other human Law than their own and that our Parliaments having the power of making and abrogating Laws they only can interpret them and decide hard cases it plainly appears there can be no truth in our Author's assertion that the King is the Author Corrector and Moderator of both Statute and Common Law and nothing can be more frivolous than what he adds that neither of them can be a diminution of that natural power which Kings have over their People as fathers in as much as the differences between paternal and monarchical Power as he asserts it are vast and irreconcileable in principle and practice as I have proved at large in the former parts of this Work But lest we should be too proud of the honour he is pleased to do to our Parliaments by making use of their Authority he says We are first to remember that till the Conquest which name for the glory of our Nation he gives to the coming in of the Normans there could be no Parliament assembled of the General States because we cannot learn that until those days it was intirely united in one Secondly he doubts Whether the Parliament in the time of the Saxons were composed of the Nobility and Clergy or whether the Commons were also called but concludes there could be no Knights of any Shires because there were no Shires Thirdly That Henry the first caused the Commons first to assemble Knights and Burgesses of their own chusing and would make this to be an act
according to the variety of times and other occurrences We have such footsteps remaining of the name of Baron as plainly shew the signification of it The Barons of London and the Cinq Ports are known to be only the Freemen of those places In the petty Court-Barons every man who may be of a Jury is a Baron These are Noblemen for there are noble Nations as well as noble men in Nations The Mammalukes accounted themselves to be all noble tho born slaves and when they had ennobled themselves by the use of Arms they look'd upon the noblest of the Egyptians as their slaves Tertullian writing not to some eminent men but to the whole People of Carthage calls them Antiquitate Nobiles Nobilitate felices Such were the Saxons ennobled by a perpetual application to those exercises that belong to Noblemen and an abhorrence to any thing that is vile and sordid Lest this should seem far fetch'd to those who please themselves with cavilling they are to know that the same General Councils are expressed by other Authors in other words They are called The General Council of the Bishops Noblemen Counts all the wise men Elders and People of the whole Kingdom in the time of Ina. In that of Edward the elder The Great Council of the Bishops Abbots Noblemen and People William of Malmsbury calls them The General Senat and Assembly of the People Sometimes they are in short called Clergy and People but all express the same power neither received from nor limitable by Kings who are always said to be chosen or made and sometimes deposed by them William the Norman found and left the Nation in this condition Henry the second John and Henry third who had nothing but what was conferred upon them by the same Clergy and People did so too Magna Charta could give nothing to the People who in themselves had all and only reduced into a small Volume the Rights which the Nation was resolved to maintain brought the King to confess they were perpetually inherent and time out of mind enjoyed and to swear that he would no way violate them if he did he was ipso facto excommunicated and being thereby declared to be an execrable perjur'd Person they knew how to deal with him This Act has bin confirmed by thirty Parliaments and the proceedings with Kings who have violated their Oaths as well before as after the time of Henry the third which have bin already mentioned are sufficient to shew that England has always bin governed by it self and never acknowledged any other Lord than such as they thought fit to set up SECT XXIX The King was never Master of the Soil THOSE who without regard to truth resolve to insist upon such points as they think may serve their designs when they find it cannot be denied that the powers before mentioned have bin exercised by the English and other Nations say that they were the concessions of Kings who being masters of the Soil might bestow parcels upon some Persons with such conditions as they pleased retaining to themselves the supreme dominion of the whole and having already as they think made them the Fountains of Honour they proceed to make them also the Fountains of Property and for proof of this alledg that all Lands tho held of mean Lords do by their Tenures at last result upon the King as the Head from whom they are enjoyed This might be of force if it were true but matters of the highest importance requiring a most evident proof we are to examine First if it be possible and in the next place if it be true 1. For the first No man can give what he has not Whoever therefore will pretend that the King has bestowed this propriety must prove that he had it in himself I confess that the Kings of Spain and Portugal obtained from the Pope grants of the Territories they possessed in the West-Indies and this might be of some strength if the Pope as Vicar of Christ had an absolute dominion over the whole earth but if that fail the whole falls to the ground and he is ridiculously liberal of that which no way belongs to him My business is not to dispute that point but before it can have any influence upon our Affairs our Kings are to prove that they are Lords of England upon the same Title or some other equivalent to it When that is done we shall know upon whom they have a dependence and may at leisure consider whether we ought to acknowledg and submit to such a Power or give reasons for our refusal But there being no such thing in our present case their property must be grounded upon something else or we may justly conclude they have none In order to this 't is hardly worth the pains to search into the obscure remains of the British Histories For when the Romans deserted our Island they did not confer the right they had whether more or less upon any man but left the enjoyment of it to the poor remainders of the Nation and their own established Colonies who were grown to be one People with the Natives The Saxons came under the conduct of Hengist and Horsa who seem to have bin sturdy Pirats but did not that I can learn bear any Characters in their persons of the so much admired Sovereign Majesty that should give them an absolute dominion or propriety either in their own Country or any other they should set their feet upon They came with about a hundred men and chusing rather to serve Vortigern than to depend upon what they could get by rapine at Sea lived upon a small proportion of Land by him allotted to them Tho this seems to be but a slender encouragement yet it was enough to invite many others to follow their Example and Fortune so that their number increasing the County of Kent was given to them under the obligation of serving the Britans in their Wars Not long after Lands in Northumberland were bestowed upon another company of them with the same condition This was all the Title they had to what they enjoyed till they treacherously killed four hundred and sixty or as William of Malmsbury says three hundred principal men of the British Nobility and made Vortigern Prisoner who had bin so much their Benefactor that he seems never to have deserved well but from them and to have incens'd the Britans by the favour he shew'd them as much as by the worst of his Vices And certainly actions of this kind composed of falshood and cruelty can never create a right in the opinion of any better men than Filmer and his Disciples who think that the power only is to be regarded and not the means by which it is obtained But tho it should be granted that a right had bin thus acquired it must accrue to the Nation not to Hengist and Horsa If such an acquisition be called a Conquest the benefit must belong to
Towns and Provinces upon the most eminent men in them And whilst those Kings were exercised in almost perpetual Wars and placed their glory in the greatness of the actions they atchieved by the power and valour of their people it was their interest always to chuse such as seemed best to deserve that honour It was not to be imagined that through the weakness of some and malice of others those dignities should by degrees be turned into empty titles and become the rewards of the greatest crimes and the vilest services or that the noblest of their Descendents for want of them should be brought under the name of Commoners and deprived of all privileges except such as were common to them with their Grooms Such a stupendous change being in process of time insensibly introduced the foundations of that Government which they had established were removed and the superstructure overthrown The balance by which it subsisted was broken and 't is as impossible to restore it as for most of those who at this day go under the name of Noblemen to perform the duties required from the antient Nobility of England And tho there were a charm in the name and those who have it should be immediately filled with a spirit like to that which animated our Ancestors and endeavour to deserve the Honors they possess by such Services to the Country as they ought to have perform'd before they had them they would not be able to accomplish it They have neither the interest nor the estates required for so great a work Those who have estates at a rack Rent have no dependents Their Tenants when they have paid what is agreed owe them nothing and knowing they shall be turn'd out of their Tenements as soon as any other will give a little more they look upon their Lords as men who receive more from them than they confer upon them This dependence being lost the Lords have only more mony to spend or lay up than others but no command of men and can therefore neither protect the weak nor curb the insolent By this means all things have bin brought into the hands of the King and the Commoners and there is nothing left to cement them and to maintain the union The perpetual jarrings we hear every day the division of the Nation into such factions as threaten us with ruin and all the disorders that we see or fear are the effects of this rupture These things are not to be imputed to our original Constitutions but to those who have subverted them And if they who by corrupting changing enervating and annihilating the Nobility which was the principal support of the antient regular Monarchy have driven those who are truly Noblemen into the same interest and name with the Commons and by that means increased a party which never was and I think never can be united to the Court they are to answer for the Consequences and if they perish their destruction is from themselves The inconveniences therefore proceed not from the institution but from the innovation The Law was plain but it has bin industriously rendred perplex They who were to have upheld it are overthrown That which might have bin easily performed when the people was armed and had a great strong virtuous and powerful Nobility to lead them is made difficult now they are disarmed and that Nobility abolished Our Ancestors may evidently appear not only to have intended well but to have taken a right course to accomplish what they intended This had effect as long as the cause continued and the only fault that can be ascribed to that which they established is that it has not proved to be perpetual which is no more than may be justly said of the best human Constitutions that ever have bin in the world If we will be just to our Ancestors it will become us in our time rather to pursue what we know they intended and by new Constitutions to repair the breaches made upon the old than to accuse them of the defects that will for ever attend the Actions of men Taking our Affairs at the worst we shall soon find that if we have the same spirit they had we may easily restore our Nation to its antient liberty dignity and happiness and if we do not the fault is owing to our selves and not to any want of virtue and wisdom in them SECT XXXVIII The Power of calling and dissolving Parliaments is not simply in the King The variety of Customs in chusing Parliament men and the Errors a people may commit neither prove that Kings are or ought to be Absolute THE original of magistratical Power the intention of our Ancestors in its creation and the ways prescribed for the direction and limitation of it may I presume sufficiently appear by what has bin said But because our Author taking hold of every twig pretends that Kings may call and dissolve Parliaments at their pleasure and from thence infers the Power to be wholly in them alledges the various customs in several parts of this Nation used in the elections of Parliament men to proceed from the King's will and because a people may commit Errors thinks all Power ought to be put into the hands of the King I answer 1. That the Power of calling and dissolving Parliaments is not simply in Kings They may call Parliaments if there be occasion at times when the Law dos not exact it they are placed as Sentinels and ought vigilantly to observe the motions of the Enemy and give notice of his approach But if the Sentinel fall asleep neglect his duty or maliciously endeavour to betray the City those who are concern'd may make use of all other means to know their danger and to preserve themselves The ignorance incapacity negligence or luxury of a King is a great calamity to a Nation and his malice is worse but not an irreparable ruin Remedies may be and often have bin found against the worst of their Vices The last French Kings of the Races of Meroveus and Pepin brought many mischiefs upon the Kingdom but the destruction was prevented Edward and Richard the Seconds of England were not unlike them and we know by what means the Nation was preserved The question was not who had the Right or who ought to call Parliaments but how the Commonwealth might be saved from ruin The Consuls or other chief Magistrates in Rome had certainly a right of assembling and dismissing the Senat But when Hannibal was at the Gates or any other imminent danger threatned them with destruction if that Magistrate had bin drunk mad or gained by the Enemy no wise man can think that Formalities were to have bin observed In such cases every man is a Magistrate and he who best knows the danger and the means of preventing it has a right of calling the Senat or People to an Assembly The people would and certainly ought to follow him as they did Brutus and Valerius against Tarquin or Horatius and
his hands it would neither bring inconvenience or danger on the present King He can with patience expect that nature should take her course and would neither anticipate nor secure his entrance into the possession of the power by taking one day from the life of his Brother Tho the Papists know that like a true Son of their Church he would prefer the advancement of their Religion before all other considerations and that one stab with a Dagger or a dose of Poison would put all under his feet not one man would be found among them to give it The Assassins were Mahometans not pupils of the honest Jesuits nor ever employ'd by them These things being certain all our concernments would be secure if instead of the foolish Statutes and antiquated Customs on which our Ancestors and we have hitherto doted we may be troubled with no Law but the King's will and a Proclamation may be taken for a sufficient declaration of it We shall by this means be delivered from that Liberty with a mischief in which our mistaken Nation seems so much to delight This phrase is so new and so peculiar to our Author that it deserves to be written upon his Tomb. We have heard of Tyranny with a mischief Slavery and Bondage with a mischief and they have bin denounced by God against wicked and perverse Nations as mischiefs comprehending all that is most to be abhorr'd and dreaded in the world But Filmer informs us that Liberty which all wise and good men have in all ages esteemed to be the most valuable and glorious privilege of mankind is a mischief If he deserve credit Moses Joshua Gideon Sampson and Samuel with others like them were enemies to their Country in depriving the people of the advantages they enjoy'd under the paternal care of Pharaoh Adonibezek Eglon Jabin and other Kings of the neighbouring Nations and restoring them to that Liberty with a mischief which he had promised to them The Israelites were happy under the power of Tyrants whose Proclamations were Laws and they ought to have bin thankful to God for that condition and not for the deliverances he wrought by the hands of his Servants Subjection to the will of a man is happiness Liberty is a mischief But this is so abominably wicked and detestable that it can deserve no answer SECT XLIV No People that is not free can substitute Delegates HOW full soever the Power of any person or people may be he or they are obliged to give only so much to their Delegates as seems convenient to themselves or conducing to the ends they desire to attain but the Delegate can have none except what is conferred upon him by his Principal If theresore the Knights Citizens and Burgesses sent by the People of England to serve in Parliament have a Power it must be more perfectly and fully in those that send them But as was proved in the last Section Proclamations and other significations of the King's pleasure are not Laws to us They are to be regulated by the Law not the Law by them They are to be considered only so far as they are conformable to the Law srom which they receive all the strength that is in them and can confer none upon it We know no Laws but our own Statutes and those immemorial Customs established by the consent of the Nation which may be and often are changed by us The Legislative Power therefore that is exercised by the Parliament cannot be conferred by the Writ of Summons but must be essentially and radically in the People from whom their Delegates and Representatives have all that they have But says our Author They must only chuse and trust those whom they chuse to do what they list and that is as much liberty as many of us deserve for our irregular Elections of Burgesses This is ingeniously concluded I take what Servant I please and when I have taken him I must suffer him to do what he pleases But from whence should this necessity arise Why may not I take one to be my Groom another to be my Cook and keep them both to the Offices for which I took them What Law dos herein restrain my Right And if I am free in my private capacity to regulate my particular affairs according to my own discretion and to allot to each Servant his proper work why have not I with my Associates the Freemen of England the like liberty of directing and limiting the Powers of the Servants we employ in our publick Affairs Our Author gives us reasons proportionable to his judgment This were liberty with a mischief and that of chusing only is as much as many of us deserve I have already proved that as far as our Histories reach we have had no Princes or Magistrates but such as we have made and they have had no other power than what we have conferred upon them They cannot be the judges of our merit who have no power but what we gave them thrô an opinion they did or might deserve it They may distribute in parcels to particulars that with which they are entrusted in the gross But 't is impossible that the Publick should depend absolutely upon those who are nothing above other men except what they are made to be for and by the Publick The restrictions therefore of the peoples Liberty must be from themselves or there can be none Nevertheless I believe that the Powers of every County City and Borough of England are regulated by the general Law to which they have all consented and by which they are all made Members of one political Body This obliges them to proceed with their Delegates in a manner different from that which is used in the United Netherlands or in Switserland Amongst these every Province City or Canton making a distinct body independent from any other and exercising the sovereign Power within it self looks upon the rest as Allies to whom they are bound only by such Acts as they themselves have made and when any new thing not comprehended in them happens to arise they oblige their Delegates to give them an account of it and retain the power of determining those matters in themselves 'T is not so amongst us Every County dos not make a distinct Body having in it self a sovereign Power but is a Member of that great Body which comprehends the whole Nation 'T is not therefore for Kent or Sussex Lewis or Maidstone but for the whole Nation that the Members chosen in those places are sent to serve in Parliament and tho it be fit for them as Friends and Neighbours so far as may be to hearken to the opinions of the Electors for the information of their Judgments and to the end that what they shall say may be of more weight when every one is known not to speak his own thoughts only but those of a great number of men yet they are not strictly and properly obliged to give account of their actions to any
unless the whole body of the Nation for which they serve and who are equally concerned in their resolutions could be assembled This being impracticable the only punishment to which they are subject if they betray their trust is scorn infamy hatred and an assurance of being rejected when they shall again seek the same honor And tho this may seem a small matter to those who fear to do ill only from a sense of the pains inflicted yet it is very terrible to men of ingenuous spirits as they are supposed to be who are accounted fit to be entrusted with so great Powers But why should this be Liberty with a mischief if it were otherwise or how the liberty of particular Societies world be greater if they might do what they pleased than whilst they send others to act for them such wise men only as Filmer can tell us For as no man or number of men can give a Power which he or they have not the Achaians Etolians Latins Samnites and Tuscans who transacted all things relating to their Associations by Delegates and the Athenians Carthaginians and Romans who kept the power of the State in themselves were all equally free And in our days the United Provinces of the Netherlands the Switsers and Grisons who are of the first sort and the Venetians Genoeses and Luccheses who are of the other are so also All men that have any degree of common sense plainly see that the Liberty of those who act in their own persons and of those who send Delegates is perfectly the same and the exercise is and can only be changed by their consent But whatever the Law or Custom of England be in this point it cannot concern our question The general proposition concerning a Patriarchical Power cannot be proved by a single example If there be a general power every where forbidding Nations to give instructions to their Delegates they can do it no where If there be no such thing every people may do it unless they have deprived themselves of their right all being born under the same condition 'T is to no purpose to say that the Nations before mentioned had not Kings and therefore might act as they did For if the general Thesis be true they must have Kings and if it be not none are obliged to have them unless they think fit and the Kings they make are their Creatures But many of these Nations had either Kings or other Magistrates in power like to them The Provinces of the Netherlands had Dukes Earls or Marquesses Genoa and Venice have Dukes If any on account of the narrowness of their Territories have abstained from the name it dos not alter the case for our dispute is not concerning the name but the right If that one man who is in the principal Magistracy of every Nation must be reputed the Father of that people and has a Power which may not be limited by any Law it imports not what he is called But if in small Territories he may be limited by Laws he may be so also in the greatest The least of men is a man as well as a Giant And those in the West-Indies who have not above twenty or thirty Subjects able to bear Arms are Kings as well as Xerxes Every Nation may divide it self into small parcels as some have done by the same Law they have restrained or abolished their Kings joined to one another or taken their hazard of subsisting by themselves acted by delegation or retaining the Power in their own persons given finite or indefinite Powers reserved to themselves a power of punishing those who should depart from their duty or referred it to their General Assemblies And that Liberty for which we contend as the Gift of God and Nature remains equally to them all If men who delight in cavilling should say that great Kingdoms are not to be regulated by the Examples of small States I desire to know when it was that God ordained great Nations should be Slaves and deprived of all right to dispose matters relating to their Government whilst he left to such as had or should divide themselves into small parcels a right of making such Constitutions as were most convenient for them When this is resolved we ought to be informed what extent of territory is required to deserve the name of a great Kingdom Spain and France are esteemed great and yet the Deputies or Procuradores of the several parts of Castille did in the Cortez held at Madrid in the beginning of Charles the fifths reign excuse themselves from giving the supplies he desired because they had received no orders in that particular from the Towns that sent them and afterwards receiving express orders not to do it they gave his Majesty a flat denial The like was frequently done during the reigns of that great Prince and of his Son Philip the second And generally those Procuradores never granted any thing of importance to either of them without particular Orders from their Principals The same way was taken in France as long as there were any General Assemblies of Estates and if it do not still continue 't is because there are none For no man who understood the Affairs of that Kingdom did ever deny that the Deputies were obliged to follow the Orders of those who sent them And perhaps if men would examin by what means they came to be abolished they might find that the Cardinals de Richelieu and Mazarin with other Ministers who have accomplished that work were acted by some other principle than that of Justice or the establishment of the Laws of God and Nature In the General Assembly of Estates held at Blois in the time of Henry the third Bodin then Deputy for the third Estate of Vermandois by their particular Order proposed so many things as took up a great part of their time Other Deputies alledged no other reason for many things said and done by them highly contrary to the King's will than that they were commanded so to do by their superiors These General Assemblies being laid aside the same Custom is still used in the lesser Assemblies of Estates in Languedoc and Britany The Deputies cannot without the infamy of betraying their Trust and fear of punishment recede from the Orders given by their principals and yet we do not find that Liberty with a mischief is much more predominant in France than amongst us The same method is every day practised in the Diets of Germany The Princes and great Lords who have their places in their own right may do what they please but the Deputies of the Cities must follow such Orders as they receive The Histories of Denmark Sweden Poland and Bohemia testify the same thing and if this Liberty with a mischief do not still continue entire in all those places it has bin diminished by such means as sute better with the manners of Pirats than the Laws of God and Nature If England therefore do not still enjoy
This is he who never dos any wrong 'T is before him we appear when we demand Justice or render an account of our actions All Juries give their verdict in his sight They are his Commands that the Judges are bound and sworn to obey when they are not at all to consider such as they receive from the person that wears the Crown 'T was for Treason against him that Tresilian and others like to him in several ages were hanged They gratified the lusts of the visible Powers but the invisible King would not be mock'd He caused Justice to be executed upon Empson and Dudley He was injured when the perjur'd wretches who gave that accursed Judgment in the case of Shipmony were suffered to escape the like punishment by means of the ensuing troubles which they had chiefly raised And I leave it to those who are concerned to consider how many in our days may expect vengeance for the like crimes I should here conclude this point if the power of granting a Noli proseq Cesset Processus and Pardons which are said to be annexed to the person of the King were not taken for a proof that all proceedings at Law depend upon his will But whoever would from hence draw a general conclusion must first prove his proposition to be universally true If it be wholly false no true deduction can be made and if it be true only in some cases 't is absurd to draw from thence a general conclusion and to erect a vast fabrick upon a narrow foundation is impossible As to the general proposition I utterly deny it The King cannot stop any Suit that I begin in my own name or invalidate any Judgment I obtain upon it He cannot release a Debt of ten shillings due to me nor a Sentence for the like sum given upon an action of Battery Assault Trespass publick Nuisance or the like He cannot pardon a man condemned upon an Appeal nor hinder the person injured from appealing His power therefore is not universal if it be not universal it cannot be inherent but conferred upon him or entrusted by a superior Power that limits it These limits are fixed by the Law the Law therefore is above him His proceedings must be regulated by the Law and not the Law by his will Besides the extent of those limits can only be known by the intention of the Law that sets them and are so visible that none but such as are wilfully blind can mistake It cannot be imagined that the Law which dos not give a power to the King of pardoning a man that breaks my hedg can intend he should have power to pardon one who kills my father breaks my house robs me of my goods abuses my children and servants wounds me and brings me in danger of my life Whatever power he has in such cases is founded upon a presumption that he who has sworn not to deny or delay justice to any man will not break his Oath to interrupt it And farther as he dos nothing but what he may rightly do cum magnatum sapientum Consilio and that 't is supposed they will never advise him to do any thing but what ought to be done in order to attain the great ends of the Law Justice and the publick safety nevertheles lest this should not be sufficient to keep things in their due order or that the King should forget his Oath not to delay or deny justice to any man his Counsellors are exposed to the severest punishments if they advise him to do any thing contrary to it and the Law upon which it is grounded So that the utmost advantage the King can pretend to in this case is no more than that of the Norman who said he had gained his cause because it depended upon a point that was to be decided by his Oath that is to say if he will betray the trust reposed in him and perjure himself he may sometimes exempt a Vilain from the punishment he deserves and take the guilt upon himself I say sometimes for appeals may be brought in some cases and the Waterman who had bin pardoned by his Majesty in the year 1680 for a murder he had committed was condemned and hanged at the Assizes upon an appeal Nay in cases of Treason which some men think relate most particularly to the person of the King he cannot always do it Gaveston the two Spencers Tresilian Empson Dudley and others have bin executed as Traitors for things done by the King's command and 't is not doubted they would have bin saved if the King's power had extended so far I might add the cases of the Earls of Strafford and Danby for tho the King signed a Warrant for the execution of the first no man doubts he would have saved him if it had bin in his power The other continues in prison notwithstanding his pardon and for any thing I know he may continue where he is or come out in a way that will not be to his satisfaction unless he be found innocent or something fall out more to his advantage than his Majesty's approbation of what he has done If therefore the King cannot interpose his authority to hinder the course of the Law in contests between privat men nor remit the debts adjudged to be due or the damages given to the persons agriev'd he can in his own person have no other power in things of this nature than in some degree to mitigate the vindictive power of the Law and this also is to be exercised no other way than as he is entrusted But if he acts even in this capacity by a delegated power and in few cases he must act according to the ends for which he is so entrusted as the same Law says Cum magnatum sapientum consilio and is not therein to pursue his own will and interests If his Oath farther oblige him not to do it and his Ministers are liable to punishment if they advise him otherwise If in matters of Appeal he have no power and if his pardons have bin of no value when contrary to his Oath he has abused that with which he is entrusted to the patronizing of crimes and exempting such delinquents from punishment as could not be pardoned without prejudice to the publick I may justly conclude that the King before whom every man is bound to appear who dos perpetually and impartially distribute Justice to the Nation is not the man or woman that wears the Crown and that he or she cannot determine those matters which by the Law are referr'd to the King Whether therefore such matters are ordinary or extraordinary the decision is and ought to be placed where there is most wisdom and stability and where passion and privat interest dos least prevail to the obstruction of Justice This is the only way to obviate that confusion and mischief which our Author thinks it would introduce In cases of the first sort this is done in England by Judges and Juries
In the other by the Parliament which being the representative body of the People and the collected wisdom of the Nation is least subject to error most exempted from passion and most free from corruption their own good both publick and private depending upon the rectitude of their Sanctions Thev cannot do any thing that is ill without damage to themselves and their posterity which being all that can be done by human understanding our Lives Liberties and Properties are by our Laws directed to depend upon them SECT XLIII Proclamations are not Laws Our Author according to his usual method and integrity lays great weight upon Proclamations as the significations of the King's pleasure which in his opinion is our only Law But neither Law nor Reason openly directing nor by consequences insinuating that such a Power should be put into an uncertain or suspected hand we may safely deny them to be Laws or in any sense to have the effect of Laws Nay they cannot be so much as significations of his will for as he is King he can have no will but as the Law directs If he depart from the Law he is no longer King and his will is nothing to us Proclamations at most are but temporary by the advice of Council in pursuance of the Law If they be not so the Subject is no way obliged to obey them and the Counsellors are to be punished for them These Laws are either immemorial Customs or Statutes The first have their beginning and continuance from the universal consent of the Nation The latter receive their Authority and Force of Laws from Parliaments as is frequently expressed in the Preambles These are under God the best defence of our Lives Liberties and Estates they proceed not from the blind corrupt and fluctuating humor of a man but from the mature deliberation of the choicest Persons of the Nation and such as have the greatest interest in it Our Ancestors have always relied upon these Laws and 't is to be hoped we shall not be so abandoned by God so deprived of courage and common sense to suffer our selves to be cheated of the Inheritance which they have so frequently so bravely and so constantly defended Tho experience has too well taught us that Parliaments may have their failings and that the Vices which are industriously spread amongst them may be too prevalent yet they are the best helps we have and we may much more reasonably depend upon them than upon those who propagate that corruption among them for which only they can deserve to be suspected We hope they will take care of our concernments since they are as other men so soon as a Session is ended and can do nothing to our prejudice that will not equally affect them and their posterity besides the guilt of betraying their Country which can never be washed off If some should prove false to their trust 't is probable that others would continue in their integrity Or if the base arts which are usually practised by those who endeavour to delude corrupt enslave and ruin Nations should happen to prevail upon the youngest and weakest it may be reasonably hoped that the wisest will see the snares and instruct their companions to avoid them But if all things were so put into the hands of one man that his Proclamations were to be esteemed Laws the Nation would be exposed to ruin as soon as it should chance to fall into an ill hand 'T is in vain to say we have a good King who will not make an ill use of his power for even the best are subject to be deceived by flatterers and Crown'd heads are almost ever encompassed by them The principal art of a Courtier is to observe his Master's passions and to attack him on that side where he seems to be most weak It would be a strange thing to find a man impregnable in every part and if he be not 't is impossible he should resist all the attempts that are made upon him If his Judgment come to be prepossess'd he and all that depend on him are lost Contradictions tho never so just are then unsafe and no man will venture upon them but he who dares sacrifice himself for the publick good The nature of man is frail and stands in need of assistance Virtuous actions that are profitable to a Commonwealth ought to be made as far as it is possible safe easy and advantageous and 't is the utmost imprudence to tempt men to be enemies to the publick by making the most pernicious actions to be the means of obtaining honour and favour whilst no man can serve his Country but with the ruin of himself and his family However in this case the question is not concerning a person the same Counsels are to be follow'd when Moses or Samuel is in the Throne as if Caligula had invaded it Laws ought to aim at perpetuity but the Virtues of a man die with him and very often before him Those who have deserved the highest praises for wisdom and integrity have frequently left the honors they enjoyed to foolish and vicious children If virtue may in any respect be said to outlive the person it can only be when good men frame such Laws and Constitutions as by favouring it preserve themselves This has never bin done otherwise than by balancing the Powers in such a manner that the corruption which one or a few men might fall into should not be suffer'd to spread the contagion to the ruin of the whole The long continuance of Lycurgus his Laws is to be attributed to this They restrained the lusts of Kings and reduced those to order who adventured to transgress them Whereas the whole fabrick must have fallen to the ground in a short time if the first that had a fancy to be absolute had bin able to effect his design This has bin the fate of all Governments that were made to depend upon the virtue of a man which never continues long in any family and when that fails all is lost The Nations therefore that are so happy to have good Kings ought to make a right use of them by establishing the good that may outlast their lives Those of them that are good will readily join in this work and take care that their Successors may be obliged in doing the like to be equally beneficial to their own families and the people they govern If the rulers of Nations be restrained not only the people is by that means secured from the mischiefs of their vices and follies but they themselves are preserved from the greatest temptations to ill and the terrible effects of the vengeance that frequently ensues upon it An unlimited Prince might be justly compared to a weak ship exposed to a violent storm with a vast Sail and no Rudder We have an eminent example of this in the book of Esther A wicked Villain having filled the ears of a foolish King with false stories of the Jews he issues out