the Laws have been more frequently stiled or called the Laws of the Land than the King's Laws and therefore if the Denomination of them declares the right the King will be found to have no very strong Title But if they had constantly been called the King's Laws yet that is a very Sandy Foundation to build a power upon of suspending and dispensing with them at his pleasure Now if they are the King's Laws then he only made them but if the Lords and Commons also had their share in the contriving and making of them then that Advice and Consent of theirs gives them such a Title to an Interest in them that they cannot be changed or altered no more than they could be enacted without their Consent for nothing can destroy a thing but the same Power that made it and therefore unless the King alone be the same power that enacted the Laws they cannot be properly called his Laws so as that at his will and pleasure he may dispense with them But if the Laws were made and enacted by him only yet it does not follow that the King may dispense with the Laws when to him it shall seem meet for there is no King so absolute but may be limited Thus we see the Eastern Kings who were as absolute as any Princes upon Earth yet were limited and restrained by their own Promises and Acts. Even that great King Abasuerus who had Ruled over 127 Provinces when he had made a Decree he could not revoke change or dispense with it for the Writing which is written in the King's Name and sealed with the King's Ring may no man reverse Esth 8.8 no nor the King himself which is clear from that famous case of the Decree to destroy the Jews to reverse or suspend which it 's plain he wanted not Inclination and if ever would then have exerted his full power for he was prick'd on by all the Spurs and Inducements that could be in any case yet all he could do was to give the Jews leave to defend themselves therefore if those Heathen Kings were so bound by their Word and Laws of the Country it 's reasonable to suppose that Christian Princes should be as much tyed up by their Words and the Laws and if the King be bound by his Word and the Laws which he shall not pass then is he under the same obligation as if he had actually given his assent to every Law that is now in force because he has given his Word and taken an Oath to preserve and maintain all the Laws And it seems something strange to hear of a power to dispense with Penal Laws there being so late a Judgment against it the late King in Parliament disclaiming it and the whole Case is very remarkable for during the interval of a Parliament he grants a Declaration of Indulgence and at the meeting of the Parliament tells them Nothing of force or constraint brought him to make that Confession but the Truth was too evident to be denied he had done it and would stand by it and should be very angry with any man that should offer to disswade him against it Yet though he had thus braved the Parliament within ten days openly in Parliament he disclaimed it and confessed that he could not dispense with a General Law and had ordered the Seal to be pulled from the Declaration Surely the Case must be very plain that the King after he had justified the thing so solemnly yet should so suddenly eat his words and confess himself in the wrong and to that Parliament too which had almost unhinged the Government to please him which no doubt would have complied with him in it had it been less than to lift the Government quite off of the Hooks And indeed to say that the King can dispense with Penal Laws is nothing less than to dissolve the Government and resolve all into the King's Will and Pleasure for our Parliaments are then but a piece of Pageantry or Puppet-show because in a word the King can annihilate all that they shall do in many Ages all the Provisions that they shall make for the Good of the Nation are but airy notions and painted shews they are and they are not just as the King pleases Now if the King can do this to what purpose have several things been done what means the Statute de Prerog Regis 17 Ed. II for certainly it 's a thing of a much higher and transcendent nature to have power to dispense with all Penal Laws than to have the Preheminence of the Subjects in some particular cases only That he has it not in all originally is plain from that of Appeals for in case of Murder the Appeal at the suit of the Party was to be tryed before the Indictment which was the King's Suit and this was so till Henry VII's time when it was alter'd by Act of Parliament and this carries in it a great probability that there is something in England that is his Superiour but Bracton and Fleta say That Rex habet superieres in regno nempe Deum Legem Parliamentum Nay the Custom of the Mannor shall bind the King Statutes to prevent Fraud shall bind the King The King cannot give the Penalty of any Statute to any Subject he cannot pardon a common Nusance how manifestly preposterous is it then to suppose that the King can dispense with Penal Laws and is restrain'd in these and multitudes of other things of the like nature It has always been taken for Law that where the Subject has an Interest the King cannot pardon and therefore he cannot pardon one found guilty upon an Appeal at the Suit of the Party But if he can dispense with all Penal Laws he may also pardon where the Subject has an Interest and so consequently dispense with all Laws whatever and then no man's Title to his Estate is good nor can any man settle his Estate securely for Fines and Recoveries being now the means used in Settlements and those being directed by particular Acts of Parliament if therefore the King for some particular necessary Reasons shall think fit to suspend those Laws all the Settlements in England will be strangely confused and of how excellent a use upon occasion it may be to dispense with those Statutes which direct Fines and Recoveries is very easie to comprehend Now this power of dispensing seems to be of a very late date for Fortescue who wrote in Henry VI's time tells us That the Kings of England cannot alter nor change the Laws of his Realm at his pleasure and the reason he gives of it is because he governs his People by Power not only royal but also politick which is by such Laws as they themselves desire and gives a very pregnant Reason why the King cannot alter nor change the Laws because the Laws of Men are holy And he shews likewise That this Restraint is no diminution to his Power but does rather aggrandize him it
my thoughts what is to be done In the first place I do propose that every Man of them shall on their knees confess their fault to all the Commons and that to be done at this Bar one by one Next That as far as they are able that they refund all the Money they have received for secret Service Our Law will not allow a Thief to keep what he has got by stealth but of course orders restitution and shall these proud Robbers of the Nation not restore their ill gotten goods And lastly I do propose that they be Voted incapable of serving in Parliament for the future or of injoying any Office Civil or Military and order a Bill to be brought in to that purpose For it 's not fit that they who were so false and unjust in that Trust should ever be trusted again This Sir is my Opinion but if the House shall incline to any other way I shall readily comply provided a sufficient mark of Infamy be set on them that the People may know who bought and Sold them A SPEECH For the Sitting of PARLIAMENTS And against FAVOURITES A King of England at the head of his Parliament is in his full strength and power and in his greatest Splendor and Glory It is then that he can do great things and without a Parliament he is not very formidable Therefore when Kings leave off the use of Parliaments and rely upon the Advice of particular Favourites they forsake their chiefest Interest they lay aside the Staff that supports them to lean upon a broken Reed that will run into their hands and this is proved by the Example of former Kings What Kings perform'd such Enterprizes and did such wonderful things as those who still consulted their Parliaments And who had more the Command of the Peoples Purses than those Kings who met the Natives frequently in Parliament As Witness Hen. I. Edw. I. Edw. III. Hen. V. Hen. VIII Q. Eliz. and what Kings were so mean and obscure despised by their Neighbours and abhorr'd by their Subjects as those who left off the use of Parliaments and doted upon their Favourites As witness Will. II. King John Henry III. Edward II. Richard II. Henry VI. And I think it 's undeniable that when the King leaves off Parliaments he forsakes his Interest he refuses the good and chooses the bad I wish it could not be said that for two years last past the use of Parliaments has almost been laid aside It 's too true that Parliaments have been delayed and there is but a little between delaying and denying and the first step to a denyal is to delay Every Man knows the great need we have had of a Parliament these Seventeenth Months and why has it not met till now It 's very well known how earnestly it was desired by all good Protestants and true Englishmen and what applications have been made to His Majestie that it might sit and it could not be obtain'd till now And it is not to be forgotten how often it has been Prorogued and the Notice that has been given to the Nation of the several Prorogations the first time that we heard of them was by the Gazett in which is seldom any thing of truth and then out comes a Proclamation for a Prorogation about a day or two before the day of meeting When Gentlemen have disposed their Affairs that they may attend at the Parliament and possibly were on their Journey towards London upon the Road they meet the News of the Prorogation very good usage and there is nothing to be said in Justification of such short Notice but that when His Majesty by His Proclamation had appointed a farther time for the meeting of the Parliament that in plain English no Man must believe it would meet For if Gentlemen did believe it they would prepare for it and if they are prepared it 's but reasonable that sufficient Notice should be given to prevent them Certainly they who advised the King in this matter intended that none of His Majesties Proclamations should have any credit For His Majesty he put out several Proclamations against the Papists and we see how they are regarded not the least obedience yielded to them And this giving of such short notice was certainly done on purpose that those Proclamations should neither be obeyed nor believed Thus is the K. abused thus does he loose the hearts of his People and thus is the Nation abused What will become of us when we cannot believe what His Majesty says Out of Parliament the King cannot speak to his People in a more notable way than by Proclamation and as the matter is order'd these are not regarded In a Subject nothing is more Infamous than to say of him that his word is not to be relyed on he does not regard what he says And therefore what Villains are they who by their Advice do bring the King but into the suspition of it This delaving of Parliaments seems to portend the laying of Parliaments aside and if so an Army will follow for the King must govern either by a Parliament or an Army for one of them he must have now the way to get rid of Parliaments is this First Although they meet sometimes yet something must be started to hinder their success or if that wont do Prorogue or Dissolve them before any thing be finisht and thus Parliaments will be made useless and this being done it will not be long before they become burdensome and then away with them for good and all Kings only then grow out of conceit with Parliaments when their Favourites are so overgrown and their Actions are so exorbitant that they will not indure to be scann'd by a Parliament And therefore to save themselves they perswade the King to keep off the Parliament though it be to his great hurt For the last Trump at the Day of Judgment will not be more terrible to the World than the sound of an approaching Parliament is to unjust Ministers and Favourites That State is sick of a grievous Distemper when Kings neglect their Parliaments and adhere to Favourites and certainly that woe is then fallen upon that Nation which Solomon denounces for says he woe to that Nation whose King is a Child And without question he meant a Child in Understanding and not in Years We have had in England Kings who when they were Children by the help of a wise Council have govern'd very well But after that they took matters into their own hands it went very ill with England as Richard II. Henry VI. who whilest they were Children the Government was steer'd aright but their understanding not growing as fast as their Years they assumed the Government before they were ready for it and so managed matters that it 's better not to name them than to reckon them in the Catalogue of the Kings And there is yet another reason why great Favourites should advise against Parliaments Kings that dote too much upon
particular interest as well as his duty does indispensibly oblige him to do what in him lyes to support it In order to this that which is now more especially expected from us is first To inquire into the neglects of those in whom the Law has reposed any trust and Second to discover those who have broken or violated the Laws that such criminals may be brought to condign punishment And since the execution of the Laws is our proper business and that the Laws should have their course is absolutely necessary to the being of the Government It may not be impertinent as I conceive at this time to say something of the Nature of Government and particularly of our own constitution or rather it seems necessary to take all occasions to explain it considering what variety of opinions there is amongst us of that which is or ought to be the Supreme authority or power in England Many wise and learned men have written of the Nature of Government and given excellent definitions of it but of all others Plato seems to me to have done it in the fewest and plainest words which are these Government or Law says he is to preserve the huge and indigested lump of a Multitude and to bring all disorder into proportion so as to become an harmony And Next to him is the learned Aquinas says that it is a rational ordinance for the advancing of the publick good Several others have spoken to the same purpose which I omit because I will be as little tedious as I can Two things I have observed from hence first That order and peace is or ought to be the end of every Government And second That in every Government there is some particular principle that runs through the whole Scheme of that Constitution and that as that principle is followed or neglected so accordingly it goes ill or well with the publick that is when those who are intrusted with the executive power do pursue that principle every thing moves regularly and the Government is firm and stable But when they steer by any other Measures the State does unavoidably fall into disorders and Convulsions and that whoever he be that is placed at the head of the Government if he desires to have the Hearts and Prayers of his People whilst he lives and that after-Ages shall bless his Memory It is necessary first That in general he resolve to Govern well And Secondly Throughly and rightly to apprize himself of that principle that is the Soul of the Government or at least-that he be advised by such as are most likely to know it and will give him faithful Counsel Otherwise he will be like a Traveller that in the Night misses his way upon some large Plain wandering he knows not whither and is more likely to meet with some disaster than to find his way Having said this it is natural for you to expect that I should tell you what that Principle is which is the Life and Foundation of this Government If I am not much mistaken and I am verily perswaded that I am not I take it to be this That every Subject of England has so clear a property in his Life Goods and Estate and every thing else which he possesses that they cannot be taken from him nor ought he to be disturbed in the Injoyment of them without his voluntary Consent or for some Offence against the Law And in the next Place that there be not a Failure in Justice that is That no man be left without remedy where his Right is concern'd and that every Criminal be pun sht according to the Demerits of his Offence I am apt to believe that every man will think that this is very agreeable to Natural Reason and then I don't see how it can be inconsistent with the Prerogative of the Crown altho' I know that not very long since and I fear yet there are some who carry the Prerogative much higher placing it above the Law but nothing save the Iniquity of the times and the Depravity of such mens Manners could support or give Countenance to so senseless a thought For they are very ignorant of the Nature of Prerogative if they think it is a Powet to do Hurt and not to do Good Certainly the Kings Prerogative is to help and relieve the People where the Edge of the Law is too sharp and keen and not a Power by which he may Oppress and Destroy his Subjects Men are to be Govern'd by a Power that is guided by Reason unless we can suppose they have no more understanding and are of no greater Value than the Beasts that Perish It was said by one who was a very competent Judge in the Case as I remember it was Sir John Fortescue That it is a greater Power in a Prince to be restrained by Law from oppressing than to have an absolute Regal Power And says another great Author The way if Governing must be both right and clear as well as is the End And how this can be expected when a King is guided by no other Rule than that of his Will and Pleasure I don't see no more than that a man can depend upon the Weather Does not all the Examples of it that ever were prove that absolute Power and Oppression are inseparable and the one as naturally proceeds from the other as the Effect does from the Cause It 's a Riddle to me how that Prince can be called Gods Ordinance who assumes a Power above what the Law has invested him with to the grieving and oppressing of his Subjects May not the Plague Famine or Sword as well be called Gods Ordinance since one no less than the other is sent by him for the Punishment of that People he so Visits We may reasonably suppose that Order and Peace is much rather the End of Government than Oppression and Violence because God is a God of Order and when he sent the greatest Blessing upon Earth it was Peace and tho' God was often very wrath with the Kings of Israel and Judah for their Idolatry yet the Innocent Blood that they shed and the Violence and Oppression which they committed provoked him more highly and with his severest Judgements has always testityed his Displeasure against it I could run out into a large Discourse upon this Subject but I will stop here because I am perswaded that what I have already said is sufficient to convince any one that is unprejudiced That an absolute Power is so far from being the Right of a King of England that the exercise of such a Power is unlawful in any King I know very well that in the late Reigns this Doctrine would not have been indured to have said less than this would have lost a man his head For whoever would not comply with Arbitrary power was called Factious and an opposer of the Government But is it not Nonsence or very near a Kin to it to call that Seditious that is for bringing things
may have them And hence it might come to pass that the Son succeeded the Father as it befel in the case of Henry III. his Father K. John had been quarreling with his Barons and they called in Lewis the F. Prince to their aid and several swore to him but K. John dying and the Nation being willing to be at rest they chose rather to have Henry III. being a Child whom they had hopes to train up in the Principles of an English King than to admit Lewis who was a Foreigner Or else that out of Gratitude to the memory of their deceased King who had done good things for the Nation they chose his Son believing him to inherit his Father's Vertues and therefore deserved the Crown better than any other person as it befel in the case of Edw. II. and Rich. II. and Hen. VI. who all deceiv'd them and therefore were deposed I think the rest of the Instances where the Son has followed his Father into the Throne are where the Succession was continued to them by Act of Parliament or by Election in the life-time of the Father as it happen'd in the case of Rich. I. and Edw. I. But I think it is without all dispute a known Custom in England that where a man has any Estate either real or personal if it came to him by Descent although he has no further power of it yet during his Life he may dispose of it as to him shall seem meet and divest himself of it to all intents and purposes And therefore if the Crown of England comes by descent what hinders that he who enjoys it cannot alien or dispose of it during his own life for whenever it has been attempted the People has still opposed it as in the case of K. John when he laid down the Crown at the Feet of Pandulphus the Pope's Legate and he kept it three days for the Pope's use this being done without the Consent of the Nation the King was told He could not make any conveyance of it without the leave of the People and although he had the Pope for his Second who was obliged to stand by him in maintaining what he had done not only out of the advantage he would gain hereby against King John and his Successors but also to encourage his other Sons to the like Dutifulness and Obedience yet the People were Victors and the King fairly gave up the Cudgels Which methinks clears the Point very well for our Lawyers tell us That a President where the thing has been disputed is worth a thousand where there was no Contest I will give you another Instance though not the very same yet I think not impertinent to be mentioned Q. Mary upon her first enjoyment of her Husband Philip was very fond of him and thinking nothing to be too good for him she had a great desire to have him crowned but notwithstanding her Importunities the Parliament would not consent and she never had her Desire Whereas if the Crown had come to her by descent she need not have asked the Parliament leave nor had K. John been to blame to give away that which was absolutely his own It is true that in the life-time of H. II. his eldest Son was crowned but he first acquainted his Lords with his purpose which implies that he asked their consent which is very probable because they swore Allegiance to him which they would never have done had it not been with their good liking for the Lords were more sturdy in those days than they are in ours for they would yield no further than they saw there was Law and Reason for it I have heard it objected That the three Children of Hen. VIII succeeded to the Crown by his Will it may be so and yet not clear the point That the Crown comes by Inheritance for Hen. VIII had shaken off the Pope's Authority and the People might be very willing to accept his Son Edward for their King and it had been a wonder if they had refused him seeing he was a Protestant and one like to perfect the Reformation But in his Successor Q. Mary we find the President of bequeathing the Crown by Will overthrown for Edw. VI. by his last Will had given the Crown to Jane Seymour and to make the thing more valid he caused the Nobility Bishops and Judges to set their Hands to it and yet Q. Mary prevailed against this Will but Arthur Son to Jeoffery who was Brother to Rich. I. and K. John was not only Son to the elder Brother but was designed by Rich. I. to be his Successor to the Crown So that if any thing would have prevailed against the Election of the People without doubt Arthur would have had the Crown and John must have waited longer But if the Crown of England comes by Descent or Inheritance I desire to ask by what Title all the Kings and Queens since the Conquest have possessed the Throne for no man can have the face to say that the first William came in by Descent but that his Title was either by Election Conquest or Vsurpation and all that have succeeded him out of his Loins are upon the same bottom with him and if his Title was not by Election then he and all his Successors can be termed nothing but Vsurpers who came in by force and have maintained it by might against Law for it is very well known that a Possession which is illegal at first cannot be better by continuing it nor does it mend the matter if they hold it never so long the Right remains the same And therefore having said this I do presume it will be as difficult to understand those things mentioned in the 30th Chapter of Proverbs Verse the 19th as it is to prove that the Crown of England comes by Descent But possibly when there shall be a Man so much wiser than Solomon that can unriddle those four things he may be able to clear this first and resolve all other Doubts that may be proposed to him but till that be I hope the People will hold their Right in disposing of the Crown and not be bound to admit the next of Blood if he be not fit for it I will now Sir proceed to your second Demand Whether the Duke ought to be excluded and to that I do answer affirmatively That he ought to be set aside for if he had not deserved it very justly the late House of Commons would not have been so vigorous and intent upon the Bill neither would the preceding mercinary House of Commons have said a word against him if his Faults had not been very plain but the whole thing is so evident that there needs nothing more to enforce the Reasons for his exclusion for Is it a small thing to hold a Correspondence with the Pope and the French King the two great Enemies to our Religion and Government to procure Pardons for Papists and keeping none about him but Papists or Popishly
Men so it cannot be imagin'd that the Law has left Men to so wild a Justice as is guided by Passion and Affection for it had been so great a Defect in the Constitution of this Government that long before this it would have been reform'd And as it is most clear that they are thus restrain'd so those bounds and limits are no less known to them that are acquainted with the Law there are two things which have heretofore been look'd upon as very good Guides 1st What has formerly been expresly done in the like Case 2ly For want of such particular Direction then to consider that which comes the nearest to it and so proportionably to add or abate as the manner and circumstance of the Case do require These were thought very good and safe Directions till it was declared and ever since has been practised in the King's Bench that they did not regard Presidents but would make them and for ought that I can learn or find this of my Lord Devonshire is an Original What Obscurity soever may be pretended in other Cases yet in this the Law has given so positive and plain a Direction that it seems very strange how they came to lay a Fine of 30000 l. upon my Lord Devonshire The Court of Starchamber was taken away because of the unmeasurable Fines which it impos'd which alone was a plain and direct prohibition for any other Court to do the like for otherwise the Mischief remain'd for what Advantage was it to the Nation if it had not been wholly supprest the shifting of Hands gave the People no Ease in the Burden that lay upon them it was all one whether the Starchamber or King's Bench did crush them by immoderate Fines But to put all out of dispute the Statute 17 Car. says expresly That from henceforth no Court Council or place of Judicature shall be erected ordained constituted or appointed within this Realm of England or Dominion of Wales which shall have use or exercise the same or the like Jurisdiction as is or hath been used practised or exercised in the said Court of Starchamber And this was upon very good reason because those great Fines imposed in that Court were inconsistent with the Law of England which is a Law of Mercy and concludes every Fine which is left at discretion with Salvo Contenimento If the Fines imposed in the Starchamber were an intolerable Burden to the Subject and the means to introduce an Arbitrary Power and Government as that Statute recites the like proceeding in the King's Bench can be no less grievous and must produce the same Evil. Laws that are made upon new occasions or sudden immergencies the Reason upon which they were made may cease and consequently they do cease also but Laws that are grounded upon the ancient Principles of the Government cannot cease because the Reason of them will ever continue and this Statute of 17 Car. being such no doubt holds good and is now in as much force as the first moment in which it was made and therefore this Fine imposed on my Lord Devonshire is in open defiance of that Statute I think no man can altogether excuse my Lord Devonshire for my part I don 't but think it was a very inconsiderate rash act and I believe the Indiscretion of it abstracted from the Fine is a very sensible trouble to him yet if those things were wanting which may be urg'd in his excuse the Offence and Punishment don't seem to bear proportion Could not the Merits of his Father be laid in the balance nor the Surprize of meeting Coll. Culpepper for my Lord having been abused by him a man of so great Courage and Honour as my Lord Devonshire must needs feel and remember it a long time having received no satisfaction or reparation made him for it but if there were nothing of this in the Case could all that may be said to alleviate his Offence be urg'd against him with a double weight were the Circumstances of the Fact as foul and aggravating as the Malice of his Enemies could wish yet surely a less Fine might have serv'd for the Law casts in a great many grains of Mercy into every Judgment and has ever look'd upon a over-rigid prosecution of the Guilty to be no less Tyranny than the prosecution of the Not guilty because it is Summum jus and has declar'd that to be Summa Injuria But besides all this I do conceive with submission that where the Law has intrusted the Judges with a power to fine it is in a much less degree than they have done in this Case First because the Law is very cautious whom and with what it does intrust it reposes a great confidence in the King yet in some cases his Acts are not regarded by it as the King can do no Ministerial Act a Commitment per speciale mandatum Dom. regis is a void Commitment Where there lies an Action in case of Wrong done to the Party the Acts of the King in those cases according to the old Law Phrase are to be holden for none Secondly Because Liberty is so precious in the eye of the Law it is of so tender a regard that it has reserv'd the whole dispose thereof to its own immediate direction and left no part of it to the Discretion of the Judges and what the Law will not suffer to be done directly it does forbid that it be done indirectly or by a side-wind and so consequently the Judges cannot impose a greater Fine than what the Party may be capable of paying immediately into Court but if the Judges may commit the Party to Prison till the Fine be paid and withal set so great a Fine as is impossible for the Party to pay into Court then it will depend upon the Judges pleasure whether he shall ever have his Liberty because the Fine may be such as he shall never be able to pay And thus every Man's Liberty is wrested out of the dispose of the Law and is stuck under the Girdle of the Judges Thirdly Because the Nation has an Interest in the Person of every particular Subject for every Man either one way or other is useful and serviceable in his Generation but by these intolerable Fines the Nation will frequently lose a Member and the Person that is Fin'd shall not only be disabled from doing his Part in the Common-wealth but also he and his Family will become a Burden to the Land especially if he be a man of no great Estate for the excessive Charge that attends a Confinement will quickly consume all that he has and then he and his Family must live upon Charity And thus the poor man will be doubly punish'd first to wear out his days in perpetual Imprisonment and secondly to see Himself and Family brought to a Morsel of Bread Fourthly Because in all great Cases and such as require a grievous Punishment the Law has in certain awarded the Judgment and next to Life
being a greater power in a Prince to be restrained by Law from oppressing than to have an absolute regal power Necessity is a very extensive thing unless it be limited to the Common Good and to be also such that it is observable by the People for otherwise ill Pretences will never want a Necessity for any Irregularity that they have an inclination to commit it and so it will prove the Handle for all the Evil that the Wit and Malice of Devils and Wicked Men can invent or which shall be committed under the Sun And this alone will serve to make the Power of Princes nearer to that of God than any other thing whatever The dispensing with the Laws on pretence of necessary Reasons was sufficiently laughed out of countenance in the case of Ship money which carried a more probable shew with it than the necessity of dispensing with the Laws to let Papists into Office for in that of Ship-money the Mâ—stery of Necessity was so palpably unfolded and discovered that it 's strange the same Trick should be played again so soon whilst the Memory of it is yet fresh It may as well be pretended that what is done for the sake of some few particular persons is for the Common Good and to pretend it's necessary to dispense with the Penal Laws to let Papists into Office for the Laws to keep Papists out of Office were made upon the greatest Reason that could be for by refusing to take the Oaths which are but a reasonable Security to the Government they do render themselves more than suspicious that they look upon themselves to be under another Jurisdiction but by their frequent Plots and Conspiracies they have made themselves the declared Enemies of the Government for they have been the Authors of all our Disturbances and the Fire that has lighted every Flame that has broke out in this Nation And therefore it 's highly reasonable that they should have no place in the Magistracy and the Government is very tender towards them that it suffers its professed Enemies to have any Benefit under it And therefore to dispense with the Laws that Papists may be let into Office if this Necessity is justifiable then may also any other that can be thought on to serve a present turn or occasion Government and Law says Plato is to preserve the buge and undigested lump of a Multitude and to bring all Disorder into proportion so as to become an Harmony And Aquinas says It is a rational Ordinance for the advancing of the Publick Good Government says another the end of it is to protect both King and People from Wrong and Violence Justitiae fruendae causa reges esse creatore says Bodin All others who have written of Government or given a definition of it do concurr with the sence of these that are quoted the sum of all which is this That the end of Government is for the Common Good of the several Societies of Men and therefore what is not for the Common Good is repugnant to the Government so that if a power to dispense with Penal Laws be not for the Common Good then cannot the King of right pretend to it which it cannot be because it manifestly tends to alter the Government and to give up all to the will and pleasure of the King Obj. But say some the Power of dispensing with the Penal Laws is not a Trust But that will be denied till one of these three things can be proved First That the King of England has begotten all his Subjects and so they are all Princes of the Blood Secondly That God Almighty in Holy Writ has set down what form of Government every People in the World shall live under Thirdly That this Government is exactly according to that Model in Holy Writ That a King begot all his Subjects is a thing never yet heard of no not so much as in a Romance The greatest Divines that have been could never yet find that any sort of Government was set down in Holy Writ as a Model to the several People that are under the Sun and the several forms of Government that there are in the World is an undeniable proof that God left every People the Jews excepted to model and frame their Government as it suited and agreed best with the Humor and Disposition of the People who were to live under it and therefore it will follow that the People of England did frame and chuse the Laws and Constitutions under which they were to live and be governed by and therefore it is undeniable that what Power soever the King can claim by Law is a Trust invested in and granted to him by the People and if so it cannot be supposed that they would give him such a power as to leave it to his discretion to dispose of all they had as to him should seem meet for thereby they would render themselves as ridiculous as Solomon's foolish Woman who pulls down her House with her Hands for Fortescue says That no Nation did ever of their own voluntary mind incorporate themselves into a Kingdom for any other intent but only to the end that they might with more safety than before maintain themselves and enjoy their Goods from such Misfortunes and Losses as they stood in fear of for no such power surely could have proceeded from them Fortesc 34. But suppose that the People had given the King such a power yet it being repugnant to the Common Good it seems to be void of it self for our Lawyers says If the King be deceived in his Grant he may revoke it If then the King may do it when it concerns some trivial thing à fortiori may the People revoke their Grant if deceived in so high a point as their All But further in this Case of dispensing with Penal Laws as it violently tends to give up all to the King's will and pleasure so if all were at his dispose â—et in regard that it does not answer to the end of Government he cannot pretend to it for the way of governing must be both right and clear as well as is the end but how that will appear in dispensing with the Laws is as dark as a Beggar 's Pedigree For Lex fecit regem A King is given for the Kingdom and not the Kingdom for the King says St. Thomas And Fortesoue says In a Body-politick the intent of the People is the first living thing having within it Blood That is to say politick Provision for the Utility and Wealth of the same People which it dealeth forth and imparteth as well to the Head as to all the Members of the same Body whereby the Body is nourished and maintained And he says further That a King who rules by Power politick receives his Power from the People If it be objected That many things are left to his Discretion tho' it be great yet that Discretion must be guided by Law for Discretion and Law should be concomitant
Francis Hargrave THE WORKS OF THE Right Honourable Henry late L. Delamer AND Earl of Warrington CONTAINING His Lordships Advice to His Children Several Speeches in Parliament c. WITH MANY OTHER Occasional Discourses On the AFFAIRS of the Two Last Reigns BEING Original Manuscripts Written with His Lordships own Hand Never before Printed LONDON Printed for John Lawrence at the Angel and John Dunton at the Raven in the Poultrey 1694. TO The Right Honourable THE EARL OF WARRINGTON My Lord SInce my late Lord Warrington your Father trusted me with the care of your Education your Lordship has made so great a Progress in all things which I Taught you that I am now forced to procure you another Tutor You are become in a little time a great Master of several Languages and most parts of Philosophy and I may say without flattery that your Lordship hath Genius Learning and Piety enough to make one of the Best and the most Accomplish't Gentleman in England But yet your Quality requires something more for it is not enough for one in your Lordships High Station to be Humanist Geographer Historian and I may add a good Man too he must be also a States-man and a Politician but being neither my self I must repeat the same thing over again to my Shame and to your Credit that your Lordship wants a better Master Amongst several of the most Eminent Men which I could recommend to your Lordship I found none so Learned nor indeed so fit to make deep Impressions upon your Mind as your Lordships Noble Father whose Writings belongs to you as well as his Estate I don't doubt but you will strive to get the best share of his Learning nor can you fail of an Extream Delight by drawing Sciences but of the same Spring from whence your Noble Blood did flow His Book then being yours both by Inheritance and by the particular gift of its Authour it would be unjust to present it to any other but your Lordship and needless to recommend it or beg your acceptance for 't Therefore omitting any longer Preface in Recommendation of these Golden Remains I 'll only take leave to make this Observation upon them That as there is nothing wanting in them for your Lordship's Instruction both by Humane Learning and Solid Devotion I have fitted you with the Master that I look't for and whom you wanted From whom having obtained all the Qualifications which your Noble Soul is capable of you have no more to wish for but that you may live and practice 'em and it will be to me both a great Satisfaction and Honour to see my Work finisht by the same Artist who put it first into my hands and trusted me with the beginning of it It will be enough for me that I have put my hands to such a Master-piece and shall be highly honoured if your Lordship take notice of my Endeavours and sufficiently Rewarded if you grant your Protection to him who has no other Ambition than to be Your Lordships Most Humble most Obedient and most Devoted Servant J. Dela Heuze THE CONTENTS I. HIS Lordships Advice to his Children page 1 II. An Essay upon Government p. 36 III. Reasons why King James Ran away from Salisbury p. 56 IV. Observations upon the Attainder of the late Duke of Monmouth with some Arguments for the Reversing thereof p. 70 V. Of the Interest of Whig and Tory which may with most safety be depended on by the Government on the account either of Fidelity or Numbers In a Letter to a Friend p. 82 VI. A Discourse shewing who were the true Incouragers of Popery Written on the occasion of King James 's Declaration of Indulgence p. 88 VII A Speech in Parliament for the Bill of Exclusion That the next of Blood have no Absolute Right to the Crown p. 94 VIII A Speech against Arbitrary and Illegal Imprisonments by the Privy Council Several Laws for the Restraint of this Power Instance of the Exercise of this Power on Sir Gilbert Gerrard about a Black-Box An Objection answered p. 100 IX A Speech against the Bishops Voting in case of Blood Lord Coke 's Opinion against it An Act of Parliament Good to which their Consent is not had Bishops no Peers though Lords of Parliament p. 107 X. A Speech against the Pensioners in the Reign of King Charles II. p. 115 XI A Speech for the sitting of Parliaments and against King Charles the seconds Favourites p. 121 XII A Speech in Parliament on the occasion of some Justices being put out of Commission in the said Reign p. 129. XIII A Speech for the Banishing the Papists p. 133 XIV A Speech on the Corruption of the Judges Laws to prevent it Some Instances thereof particularly Sir George Jeffreys when Judge of Chester p. 138 XV. Some Observations on the Prince of Orange's Declaration On the Exit of King Charles II. and Entrance of the late King whose Administration becoming Exorbitant brought on the Present Revolution The Arbitrary Proceeding of K. James excellently set forth by the Declaration c. In a Charge to the Grand Jury p. 353 XVI A Speech against the Asserters of Arbitrary Power and the Non-Swearers p. 385 XVII A Perswasive to Union upon King James his design to Invade England in the Year 1692. p. 401 XVIII Some Reasons against Prosecuting the Dissenters upon the Poenal Laws p. 412 XIX A Discourse proving the reasonableness of the present Revolution from the Nature of Government p. 421 XX. Whether a Conspiracy to Levy War is an Overt Act of Conspiring or Imagining the Death of the King p. 437 XXI Reasons for an Union between the Church and the Dissenters p. 457 XXII Of the Absolute Power Exercised in the late Reigns and a Defence of King Williams Accession to the Throne Election the Original of Succession Succession not very Ancient Division among Protestants a step to Arbitrary Power Enemies to the Act of Indulgence Disaffected to the Government p. 467 XXIII A Speech concerning Tyranny Liberty Religion Religious Contentions Laws of Advantage to the State cannot hurt the Church Of Conquest Of God's ways of Disposing Kingdoms and against Vice p. 483 XXIV The Legality of the Convention-Parliament though not called by Writ p. 509 XXV A Resolution of Two Important Questions 1. Whether the Crown of England be Hereditary 2. Whether the Duke of York ought to be Excluded p. 541 XXVI The Case of William Earl of Devonshire for striking Collonel Culpepper p. 563 XXVII Arguments against the Dispensing Power p. 583 XXVIII Prayers which his Lordship used in his Family p. 597 XXIX Some Memoirs of the Methods used in the Two last Reigns The Amazing Stupidity of those that would reduce us again into the same Condition p. 613 XXX Some Arguments to prove that there is no Presbyterian but a Popish Plot and against the Villany of Informing in 1681. p. 627 XXXI Monarchy the best Government and the English beyond all other With some Rules for the Choice
send for any person but without that they cannot and therefore I do not see wherein a Justice of Peace has a greater power than the Privy Council or if he had yet it would not be so great a Mischief for he can only send for any person that is in the County but the Privy Council are not limited to this or that County but their power extends all over England But besides it is unjust to be punisht without a cause and restraint or being debarr'd of Liberty is a punishment and whoever he be that would have the Privy Council to exercise this Power when he has known what it is to be brought up by a Messenger upon an Idle Story let him then tell me how he likes it and answer me if he can A SPEECH AGAINST THE Bishops Voting In Case of BLOOD OF all the things that were started to hinder the success of the last Parliament and is like to be so great a stumbling-block in the next That of the Bishops Voting in Case of Blood was and will be the chief Now they that deny that the Bishops have right to Vote in Case of Blood do labour under two great difficulties first because this is a new thing at least it is very long since the like Case has come into debate And next because they are put to prove a negative which is a great disadvantage But Truth will appear from under all the false glosses and umbrages that men may draw over it And I doubt not to make it evident that the Bishops have no right to Vote in Case of Blood at least I hope I shall not be guilty of obstinacy if I do not alter my opinion till what I have to say be answered It is strange the Bishops are so jealous of their Cause as not to adventure it on their great Diana the Canon Law by which they are expresly forbidden to meddle in case of Blood Perhaps they would do by the Canon Law as it is said by the Idolaters in the Old Testament that part of the timber they made a god and fell down and worshipped it the rest of it they either burnt in the fire or cast it to the dunghil For they tell you that the Canon Law was abolisht by the Reformation and that none but Papists yeild obedience to it and therefore now they are not tyed up by the Canon Law but may sit and Vote in case of Blood if they please I should be very glad if they were as averse to Popery in every thing else and particularly that they would leave Ceremonies indifferent and not contend so highly for them whereby they make the breach wider and heighten the differences among Protestants in the doing of which they do the Pope's work most effectually I wish they would consent to have a new Book of Canons for those that are now extant are the old Popish Canons I like Bishops very well but I wish that Bishops were reduced to their primitive Institution for I fear whilst there is in England a Lord Bishop the Church will not stand very steddily But I will leave this though I need say no more and proceed to other things that are very clear as I conceive My Lord Cook in the Second Part of his Institutes the first Chapter treating of Magna Charta when he reckons up the Priviledges of the Church he tells us that Clergy-men shall not be elected or have to do in secular Office and therefore he tells us that they are discharged of such and such burdens that Lay persons were subject to and good reason it should be so that they might with greater ease and security attend the business of their Function that is to govern and instruct the Church But whether they had these Immunities granted them that they might study the Pleas of the Crown and Law Cases or else that they might apply themselves to the work of the Ministry let any Man judge for saith he Nemo militans Deo implicet se negotiis secularibus And if to sit and judge in case of Blood be not a secular Matter I have no more to say and I hope my Lord Cook 's Authority will be allowed And because as I conceive that my Lord Cook 's Authority may pass Muster in this point I will offer some things out of him that will make it evident that the Bishops are only Lords of Parliament and not Peers and if so it is against the Law of England for them to sit and judge upon any Peer for his Life for the Law says that every Man shall be tried by his Peers In the Second Part of his Institutes the first Chapter he tells us that every Arch-Bishop that holds of the King per Baroniam and called by Writ to Parliament is a Lord of Parliament But in the 14th Chapter when he reckons up who are Pares in the Lords House he says not a word of the Bishops but repeats all the other Degrees of Lords as Dukes c. And without doubt he would not have made so great an omission if the Bishops ought to have been taken into the number Besides this if the Bishops be Pares how comes it to pass that an Act of Parliament shall be good to which their consent is not had passed by the King Lords Temporal and Commons But it was never allowed for an Act of Parliament where the Lords Temporal had not given their Vote And for proof hereof see my Lord Cook in his Chap. De Asportatis Religiosorum where he gives you several Instances of Acts of Parliament that passed and the Bishops absent But then in the Third Part of his Institutes he there puts the matter out of all controversie and shews that Bishops are to be tried by Commoners for says he in the second Chap. treating of Petty Treason None shall be tried by his Peers but only such as sit there ratione Nobilitatis as Dukes c. and reckons the several Degrees and not such as are Lords of Parliament ratione Baroniarum quas tenent in Jure Ecclesiae as Arch-Bishops and Bishops and formerly Abbots and Priors but they saith he shall be tryed by the Country that is by the Free-holders for that they are not of the Degree of Nobility So that with submission this is as clear as any thing in the World If the point be so clear that the Bishops may Vote in case of Blood it would do well that some Presidents were produced by which it might appear that they have ever done it at least that they have made use of it in such times when the Nation was in quiet and matters were carried fairly for Instances from Times of Confusion or Rebellion help rather to pull down than support a Cause But my Lord Cook in his Chap. that I mentioned even now De Asportatis Religiosorum gives you several Presidents where the Bishops when Capital Matters were to be debated in the Lords House withdrew themselves particularly 2 of
soever a Parliament is corrupted whether it be by Places Pensions or any other thing that makes the Members thereof to become men of dependance The next Article against K. J. is that he Seized upon the Charters of Corporations thereby bringing their Priviledges to be disposed on at his will and pleasure This was very Notable Injustice yet the making havock of Charters was begun and carried on very far by C. II. to which the Loyalty that then prevail'd contributed very much for who ever was not for surrendering of Charters and giving up their Liberties was mark'd out as Anti-Monarchical and a Commonwealths-Man and this fantastical Loyalty had intoxicated so very many that very few Corporations stood out those that disputed the point were taught the Law of Quo Warrento So that when K. C. died he left his brother little more to do than to give the finishing stroke to that he had brought to so great Perfection by which we see how dangerous it is to make any other thing than the Law the Measure of our Loyalty for altho at first no ill consequence may be apprehended of what is done yet it is not long e're Men find their mistake by the mischief which falls upon their own Pates and with this aggravation that they don't see their error till it is out of their power to remedy it The Declaration next observes how that Ireland was put into the hands of Papists which made many to leave the Country well remembring what fell out in the year 41. This was very true and it is as true that it put every Man in England who valued his Religion and Property under very great fears and apprehensions that the storm would blow over into England Because he that would set up aarbitrary-Aarbitrary-Power in England must first try his hand upon Ireland it having been observ'd that whatever Arbitrary thing has been done in England that it has first been practised in Ireland So that when ever things go irregularly in Ireland England cannot think it self safe till affairs are put into a better posture there The Declaration further takes notice that K. J. had declared in Scotland that all his Subjects are bound to obey him without reserve This is the highest of absolute Power and it was plain he intended to do no less in England For there is nothing more certain in humane Affairs Than that when a K. mis-imploys his power in one Kingdom it is not for want of inclination but of means and opportunity that he does not do so in all other places under his Dominionâ— As for Example if a King keep one of his Kingdoms without Parliaments he would do so in another if by some necessity he were not compell'd to do otherwise for C. II. kept Ireland without Parliaments and it was out of regard to his particular Affairs that he called a Parliament in England for you may remember how quickly he sent the Parliament packing that called him in because it was more intent upon setling the Nation than to give him unnecessary supplies and those which he afterwards called were kept no longer than he could squeeze Money out of them The Declaration goes on to remind us how K. J. indeavourâ—d to discourage and take away from the Subject the right of Petitioning The priviledge of Petitioning is an ancient and necessary right and so great a right as it has always been supposed that upon such applications the K. was bound either to redress that whereof they complain'd or to let them see that their complaint was without cause But to take away this right from the people is to deprive them of the means of making known their grievances in the most humble and dutiful way that can be and puts them under a necessity of doing it with their Swords in their hands for there is but one of these two ways of letting the K. know their grievances there is nothing more fit than that Subjects tho' never so much opprest do first make known their sufferings in the humblest and most respectful manner that may be and not have recourse to more compulsive methods till no good is to be done the other way That Prince who is unwilling to hear the complaints of his People plainly intimates that he intends to govern them by the rod of his power and not by the equal and gentle methods of the Law and there seems to be no less a fearful expectation when the addresses of both or either House of Parliament don't meet with success but prove abortive for considering that the Nation does then Petition the K. in its highest Capacity it may reasonably be expected that those applications should be answered with effect unless the K. be wiser than all the World and such a Man was never yet found or else what the Parliament complains of is false or frivilous which is not easily to be suppos'd Then the Declaration reminds as of K. James's design to pack a Parliament that by the Peoples consent those things might be made a Law which he had done contrary to the right of the People and the Law of the Land which was to stab the Nation to the Heart For a Parliament is the Soveraign and only remedy for publick Distempers and if rightly apply'd works an infallible Cure but if it be corrupted makes the Malady how slight or inconsiderable soever to become Incurable He that desires to corrupt a Parliament leaves very little room to believe that the good of his people is the end of his Government for when a Prince looks upon it to be his Intrest to influence and byass the Parliament he cannot be thought to have some Interest with his People There are two ways to corrupt a Parliament The first is to influence the Elections so as to have Men chosen that will serve a particular purpose and design and 2dly if that fail to corrupt the Members by Places Pensions or good round sums of Money which is called Secret Service whereby the Nation becomes felo de se The last article against K. J. is that of imposing upon us a Prince of Wales This indeed if it were so is as great a Forgery and Cheat as ever was heard of but because those whom it more nearly concerns have not yet thought fit to inquire further into it I suppose it will not be expected that I should give any opinion of it at this time This is the substance of the charge brought by the P. Orange against K. J. I think I have not omitted any thing that is material but these are not all the irregularites that K. J. was guilty of yet are they sufficient to shew that his administration was inconsistent with the Rights and Liberties of English-Men and who is he that can imagin that there was any other means but force whereby we could recover our Rights they that think it could have been effected by gentler applications may as well pretend to bind the Leviathan with Cords Those that have
without the Law but that he might imploy his power to an ill end and those then that incourage arbitrary inclinations in their Prince are guilty of all the Oppression and Violence that he shall commit The Law is the best hold both of King and people for it 's their mutual and only interest which soever of them lets it go will have much ado to preserve themselves for never did any stand long that parted with it when the King forsakes the Law he ceases to be King and makes room for another that is more righteous than himself and therefore because he endeavoured to set his will above the Law was the late King James set aside and I am perswaded with all the Justice in the World Thus I have indeavoured in a few words to detect the unreasonableness of this arbitrary Doctrine and indeed the great Asserters of it at last discovered what was the true principle that guided them they had very honestly prescribed a rule for others which they could not practice themselves like the Pharisees who were reproved by our Saviour for laying heavy burdens upon others that they would not touch themselves Our Loyal men were very well pleased with arbitrary power whilst they might be imployed and lord it over their neighbours they little dreamt that the wheel might go round for no sooner did they see that this power was like to be exercised upon themselves but they changed their note all their encomiums upon King James were turned into the most bitter invectives that their wit could invent and their threatnings which they used to breath out against the Dissenters were turned into words of Vnity and Reconciliation I will not affirm that the mercenary principle of preferment made them so zealous for Prerogative but this is most certain their zeal never abated till they saw that other people were like to come into play and then they were as forward as any to explode the Doctrine of Non-resistance and to wish success to the Prince of Orange But since King William does not think fit to employ them nothing will serve their turn but King James And because they cannot for shame talk any more of their unshaken Loyalty they have wholly laid aside that word and now their mouths are filled with nothing but the Church and considering that they refuse the Oaths and indeavour to throw all the contempt they can upon this Government therefore in their sense the Church and this Government are two distinct interests and King James a profest bigotted Papist is more likely to support the Church than King William who is a Protestant and thus they demonstrate their care for the Church and if it be not because King William won't put them into imployment I can't imagine why they should be so averse to him unless it is because his Government is more Just and Mild and that he Governs more by the Laws than any of the four last Kings Gentlemen Your inclinations to the Government is not to be question'd yet in regard it has been indeavoured to be so much traduced it may not be improper to say some thing of it Every King of England receiving and holds his Crown upon condition to Govern according to the known and approved Laws of Land for by what means soever he may come to the Crown he can hold it by no other means than by making the Laws the measure of his Power and when he forsakes that good old way he ceases to be King and Male Administration is a forfeiture of his Crown This was the opinion of our forefathers as appears by the many instances of those Kings that have been Deposed for their evil Government And those who have succeeded them have still been acknowledged and obeyed as rightful and lawful tho the other were alive For when the Throne is vacant it naturally comes into the hands of the people because the original dispose and gift of the Crown was from them therefore whoever they place upon the Throne has as good a right to be there as the first King that wore the Crown No Government can want a power to help it self and therefore when the King has set his will above the Laws what other means has the people left but their Arms for nothing can oppose Force but Force Prayers and Tears are our proper applications to God Almighty but signifie but little with an Arbitrary Prince who will be rather confirmed in his purposes when he finds that he is like to meet with no other opposition But this opposing the King with Arms is not justifiable for every wrong step or miscarriage of the Prince save only in cases of extremity when it 's obvious to every man that the King has cast off his affection to the Common Good and sets up his will in the place of the Law and thereby rendered himself unmeet to sway the Scepter For this reason was King James deposed and therefore is this present Government justified to the last degree by very good reason and the constant practice of our Fore-fathers in the like case For long before King Charles dyed the Nation was very apprehensive of the mischief they should be exsposed to if in case the Duke of York should get into the Throne and he had not long been in possession of the Crown before he convinced the world that those jeers and apprehensions were not groundless for he quickly became so exorbitant in the exercise of his power that the Nation grew very uneasie under him where upon the Duke of Monmouth landed in order to deliver us from that which the Nation had so much cause to fear and it did not please God to give him success Yet I am perswaded it was not by reason of the justness of King James 's Cause that God permitted him to prevail for some years but that he might fill up the Measure of his Iniquities and all the Earth might see how justly he was Deposed To recount the particulars of his Male-Administration would take up too much of your time and therefore I will only say this in short That he had so notoriously broken the Constitution of this Government to set up Popery and Slavery that the Nation was necessitated to rise in Arms and by as good right did they take the Diadem from his Head as he ever had to claim it for he having rendered himself unmeet to sway the Scepter the Crown thereby fell into the hands of the people and where then could they so well and properly dispose of it as to set it on his Head that so generously and opportunely came in to our assistance at a time when the Nation lay gasping and just ready to expire with the weight of Popery and Arbitrary Power What horrible unthankfulness to God and ingratitude to King William is every man professing the Protestant Religion guilty of who is disatisfied with the present Government For I would ask any of them what else could have been done to bring
and corruption of Blood a severer Punishment cannot be impos'd than to be Fin'd more than a man can pay and to lye in Prison till he does But if some great Cases did happen which could not be foreseen it was always usual with the Judges when any such Case came before them to adjourn it to the Parliament which had been needless if they could have punish'd at the rate that our Judges have of late done Fifthly Because where-ever the Law has set down a Fine either by way of Punishment or Caution it seldom exceeds 2000 l. Nay even in that tender place of Liberty if a Judge shall not relieve with an Habeas Corpus but let the person languish in Prison yet the third Offence is but 2000 l. Penalty and I suppose that that is but inconsiderable in comparison of what any of the Judges are worth yet it being taken as a Punishment is by the Law look'd upon as a great Sum. Sixthly Because the Law of England being a Law of Mercy and very careful to prevent Violence and Oppression and to that end having for almost every Offence appointed its particular Punishment it cannot be suppos'd to have left so great a power in the Judges as they have exerted in this Case True it is some things are left to their Discretion because it was not possible to foresee every particular Case that might happen yet they are things of the least size that are so intrusted to their Judgment for as was said before matters of any considerable moment were still refer'd to the Parliament as also the review of what the Judges should do in those lesser matters which were left to their Discretion As these Proceedings are a great Wrong to the Subject so are they no less a Disadvantage to the King because they will make his Government look very rigid and severe and gives it a grim fierce Countenance which tho' I don't say that it will make the People rebel yet I am apt to believe that it will set them upon their guard its fair and gentle usage that prevails upon reasonable and free-born Men it 's an easie Government that will bow the Hearts of the People of England for says the Statute P.M. That the Estate of a King standeth more assured by the love of his Subjects than in fear of Laws so that the King will be on the losing band by these proceedings because it spoils the complexion of his Government And the King will yet be a farther Sufferer for if 30000 l. be the price of a Blow it will make White-hall very empty for he that goes thither must approach it with fear and trembling because he does not know but he shall be ruin'd before he comes thence for though a man arm himself with all the Resolution he can yet it cannot be Proof against the Contrivance of those that intend to do him a Mischief especially if he is not upon very good terms at Court there will never want those who will endeavour to draw him into the Snare hoping to merit by it though perhaps they mistake their aim yet however Revenge that is so sweet will be greatly encourag'd to provoke him because he cannot hope to reek his Malice so plentifully as this way because if his â—â—â—â—mpt succeed the other is ruin'd nay if he do not strike but only defend himself yet if the Judges don't like the Complexion of the Man they will call the Fox's Ears Horns and lay all the Blame on his Back and pronounce him more guilty that looks over the Hedge than he that steals the Horse Since the Business of my Lord Devonshire happened I have heard him blam'd as the Author of his own Misfortune and that he drew the Mischief upon himself and the Reason given was because he ought not to have gone to Court for said they he knew there were many there who wish'd him ill and therefore sooner or later he would meet with an Affront and if he once fell into their Hands he must expect no Quarter because Coll. Culpepper who without any provocation of my Lord's part had so unnecessarily fallen upon him and had by drawing Blood upon my Lord forfeited his Hand yet not only that but all the rest of the Judgment was pardoned and therefore as well that as this are look'd upon as businesses that were laid But in saying this I only tell your Lordships what is said without doors and I don't speak it as my Opinion but setting the tattle without doors aside I do conceive that can never be a just Judgment which injures the King as well as the party that is punish'd But the true nature of my Lord Devonshire's Offence has not yet been throughly considered the Law does in all cases give great Allowances to what is done on a sudden heat where there does not appear any Premeditation and for this Reason when a man is indicted for Murder if upon the Evidence there does not appear Malice prepence either express'd or imply'd the Party accused shall have his Clergy and for the same reason though it be Death to maim or disfigure another yet if it be done on a sudden heat the Party shall not dye for it for in these and the like cases the Law thinks him to be more blame worthy who gave the Provocation than he that was so provok'd because it was not the effect of an evil Mind but of Passion Et actus non sit reus nisimens sit rea If therefore it be true which I have heard That the King promised my Lord Devonsh that Coll. Culpepper should never come to Whitehall it will then follow that my Lord Devonshire's striking Coll. Culpepper was the effect of Passion and not of Intention because he could not expect to meet him where he did If so I conceive with submission that the Punishment and Offence don't in any measure bear proportion But I am perswaded that the Judges were resolved upon what they have done before they heard the Cause in case my Lord was found guilty and the rather because my Lord Chief Justice was harranguing the Offence beforehand for when my Lord Devonshire appeared 6. May he told him that to strike in the King's Palace was little less or next door to pulling the King out of his Throne Indeed on the last day of the Term he did explain them thus That the Time and Circumstances might be such as it would be little less than the assaulting the King in his Throne But several have told me who heard him and they say The first words of Time and Circumstances were not mention'd by him 6. May and in particular a Noble Lord of this House is one from whom I had my Information and if it were so those words savour too much of a prejudging the Cause There is no doubt but in case of a Fine set the Court may commit the Party in case of obstinacy for not paying the Fine into Court yet this is to be taken
cum grano salis for if the Fine be immoderate or else he has not the Money then ready but either offers Security to pay it or else prays for some time and in the interim to stand upon his Recognizance in either of these Cases to commit for not paying the Fine into Court is not justifiable because it is to punish for not doing an Impossibility for Lex non legit ad impossibilia Secondly It is not justifiable because if the Fine be paid the Law is as much satisfied if it be paid five years hence as if it be paid then immediately into Court for the Law does not suppose that the most wealthy man does carry so much Money about him Thirdly It is very unreasonable because it does in a great part disable the person to pay the Fine for if he be a man that manages his own Affairs his Writings that are necessary to make the Security may be so dispos'd of that it will be difficult to come at them besides there being a necessity upon him to have the Money those of whom he is to have it will be very apt to hold him to harder terms for the World is so unnatural and brutish that one man is but too prone to make his Advantages upon the Misfortunes and Necessities of another and that Proverb Homo homini lupus is in no Case more true than in the business of Money ARGUMENTS AGAINST The Dispensing Power THAT which Sir M.H. Resolved by Lord Chancellor Egerton no Non obstante could dispense with the Law about Sale of Offices Coke 234. foresaw and prophecied is now fulfilled viz. That our Slavery whenever it happen'd was rather to be feared from the Twelve Redcoats in Westminster-ball than from 12000 standing Forces for this Opinion if from henceforward it shall be Law then has our Freedom received a dreadful Wound in the Head for we shall hold all our Rights and Properties but precariously even no longer than it is the King's pleasure to have it so But be it as it will and how clear soever it may appear to the Judges yet at present it does confound the Vnderstandings of all People besides because till now it has been hidden from the Eyes of our ablest Sages of the Law wrapt up in such Clouds and thick Darkness that the most discerning of them have not been able to pry into it and therefore it passes all our Understandings that this Sett of Judges who had not Law enough to employ them at the Bar before they were raised to the Bench should find out the Secret and give an Absolute Opinion for which there is not any president to be produced and therefore shrewdly to be suspected that it is not grounded upon Law no more than those Opinions were for which several Judges have been hanged The Law of England has ever been reputed to be as plain and intelligible as that of the Jews which was written on the Palms of their Hands save only when Judges are ignorant and needy and are assured that Parliaments are at a great distance and then only are such Opinions as those given for their Ignorance makes them assured their Poverty makes them leap before they look and when Parliaments seem very remote under that shelter they grow bold But it is to be hoped that such Opinions as these will pass for Law no longer than the Nation is govern'd without a Parliament which sooner or later will come as certain as that there will be a Day of Judgment It is strange that these Judges should understand so great a Mystery as this unless there be as great Vertue in a Judge's Gown as was in the Mantle of Elijah and if so how happens it that the same Spirit has not rested on those who have sate before them on the Bench but if a double Portion of that Excellent Spirit is rested upon our present Judges that they are able to dive into so great a Mystery as this and see so much further than any who have been before them surely they are also endowed with the Tongue of Angles and so can explain this matter to the Understandings of the People which in Duty they are bound to do or else in time with the price of their Heads they may come to give the true Reasons of this their Opinion 1. That the Kings of England are Soveraign Princes 2. That the Laws of England are the King's Laws 3. That therefore it is an incident inseparable Prerogative in the Kings of England as in all other Soveraign Princes to dispense with all Penal Laws in particular Cases and upon particular necessary Reasons 4. That of these Reasons and Necessities the King himself is the sole Judge and which is consequent thereupon 5. That this is not a Trust invested in or granted to the King but the ancient Remains of the Soveraign Power and Prerogative of the Kings of England which never was yet taken from them nor can be Therefore in this Case such Dispensation being pleaded by the Defendant and such Dispensation being allow'd by the Demurrer of the Plaintiff and this Dispensation appearing upon Record to come time enough to save the Defendant from the forfeiture Judgment ought to be given for the Defendant quod querens nil capiat per billam Soveraign Power is of a vast extent that is as much as unlimited and to which no Bounds is or can be set That the Kings of England in Parliament have a Soveraign Power is true that with the Consent and Concurrence of the Lords and Commons he may do what he will is without question and it is as certain that out of Parliament his Power is limited and confined within certain Bounds and Limits which he cannot pass without doing violence to Justice and the Laws for there are two Powers in the King the one in Parliament and that is Soveraign the other out of Parliament which may be directed and controuled by the former and therefore called Potestas subordinata pag. 10. Rights of the People p. 9. Argument of Property therefore his Power is Soveraign only sub modo for out of Parliament many of his Acts are not only questionable but void in themselves Rights of the Kingdom 83. for what he shall do against Law those Acts bind no more than if they were a Child's he cannot command one man to kill another he cannot pardon a common Nusance nor an Appeal at the suit of the Party And multitudes of the like Instances might be given for if the King's power out of Parliament was as great as in Parliament then there 's an end of the Policy of this Government and the Barons Wars was only to beat the Air. It is most certain that till these late days during which we have been so very much Frenchified Roads are called the King's Highway but the Freehold is in the Lord of the Soil and of the Profits growing there as Trees c. Terms of the Law 56. that