Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	france_n	king_n	truce_n	4,090	5	11.7228	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A75357	Anglia liberata, or, The rights of the people of England, maintained against the pretences of the Scotish King, as they are set forth in an Answer to the Lords Ambassadors propositions of England. Which ansvver was delivered into the Great Assembly of the United Provinces at the Hague, by one Mac-Donnel, who entitles himself Resident for his Majesty, &c. June 28/18 1651: and is here published according to the Dutch copy. Whereto is added a translation of certain animadversions upon the answer of Mac-Donnel. Written by an ingenious Dutch-man. As also an additional reply to all the pretended arguments, insinuations and slanders, set forth in the said Scotish answer written a while since by a private pen, and now presented to the publick.	MacDonnell, William, Sir.; Ingenious Dutch-man.	1651 (1651)	Wing A3178; Thomason E643_7; ESTC R18922	48,537	72

question when this Officer the King shall either for male-administration or treachery in his trust be put to death or banished with his whole family the Treaties Contracts and Alliances made in his name with any Forain State must needs continue in full force and power to all intents and purposes as long as the People and Community are in being whose Contracts they are To this accords that of Grotius likewise l. 2. c. 15. Si cum Rege contractum sit non statim personale erit censendum foedus i.e. If a League be made with a King it must not be presently looked upon as a personal League For as he saith in the same place after Pedius and Vlpian plerumque persona pacto inseritur non ut personable pactum fiat sedut demonstretur cum quo pactum est The person of the Prince is usually mentioned in the League not that the League should become personal but only to shew with whom it was made But it may be objected that the League with Holland extends not only to the King but to his Successors also 'T is true it doth hold as to the succession that is as long as the succession holds for Leagues must hold to the persons of Princes and their successors as all other Political Compacts between them do viz. with a tacit condition of holding their possessions If the King of Scots can with the peoples consent make good his succession in England then he may lay claim to the Treaties made betwixt England and Holland but in the mean time Hee and his Family being driven out for their Tyranny all the Right to those Contracts is to be exercised by another Succession and Form of Government that is established in the Right and by Authority of the people Nor can this Alteration of Government any whit alter the Case it being a right naturally inherent in all Nations to alter their respective Governments upon occasion into what form they please As long as the people remain the same specifical I do not mean the same individual people of England that they were when the right of Treaty was used and the Treaty with Holland made and ratified by the King in their behalf so long the effects of the Treaty or Treaties are in force to the same ends and purposes that they were at first intended Seneca saith by way of comparison Manet idem flumen aqua transmissa est the River remains the same though the water pass away and Aristotle 3. lib. Pol c. 2. traceth him in the same quaint way of allusion likening the People to a River which retains its old name and is said to be the same that it was long since though a continued succession of new waters doe flow in the Channel so the People that is now is the same in specie that it was an hundred or perhaps a thousand years since and is so called and reputed except it lose the name and estimate of a Nation by being captivated and caried away from their Countrey as the Jews were all in time from Jerusalem and the Holy Land or inslaved in their own Countrey by some Forain Power that holds them in Vassalage as the Olynthians were under Philip the Thebans under his son Alexander the Capuans under the Romans or as the old Britains were under the Saxons the Saxons under the Danes and afterwards under the Tyranny of the Norman Conquerour When their National Power and Authority is once extinct they no longer retain their former interest priviledge or dignity But none of these exceptions blessed be God can be verified upon the people of England who are seated pleno Jure in their own fortunate Island and established now in a greater measure of Honour Power and Freedom then ever we enjoyed for many hundred years before Foelices nimiùm bone si sua nôrint And therefore of necessity they must be accounted specifically the same Nation or people that they were when the Treaties were made and concluded betwixt England and the Netherlands though they be not the very same Individuall People and Government No matter saith Grotius l. 2. c. 9. how the Nation be governed whether by a King or by many or by the multitude For the people of Rome remained the same still in the various changes of Government under Kings Consuls and Emperours When the former is extinct a new form ever succeeds with power to govern act and transact in and for the behalfe of the people who being still the same not tied to Forms nor altered by Time over-look all Circumstances and lay hold upon the Substantials of their Interest and Government as they stand qualified and related both at home and abroad And truly it is very pleasant to observe in this particular how even Princes themselves acknowledge as much in their Practises towards each other in the changes of Government For the Duke of Burgoin having concluded amity with England in the person of Henry the 6. no sooner was Henry dispossessed and Edward the 4. invested but he immediatly renues the same League with England in the person of Edward Afterwards Edward hapning to be driven out it was so brought about by Burgoin that the Truce formerly concluded betwixt him and King Edward should in all things bee ratified and confirmed the King's name onely changed to Henry At length Edward made shift to recover all again and then Henry was once more dethroned which was no sooner done but Burgoin sent again a solemn Embassage to renue the Treaty and establish a firm League with England in the person of Edward It is to be observed likewise that during all these Changes Ambassadors went to and fro and all Forain Contracts and Alliances were kept entire without the least question on either side which may serve to inform us of these two particulars That in National quarrels about Title to Government Princes use not to dispute who is in the right or wrong but apply themselves without farther scruple to the parties in possession And secondly that however the Governours of a Countrey may be changed yet all the points of Alliance and Contract being centred in the right and benefit of the people continue unchangeable and entire under every alteration It were endless to reckon up all the examples that might be derived from the practises of States and Princes to confirm this particular we might shew you how the matter of Government being in dispute betwixt Queen Mary and her son James or rather his Guardians though Mary were dethroned and her Sons Guardians got the better yet the amity betwixt us and Scotland continued firm notwithstanding the deposition of the person of Mary But because the Scottish Resident seems to grant that Leagues may hold entire in State-Ruptures though a particular Prince be laid aside but not so if the frame of Government be altered therefore he may be pleased to consider that in the various revolutions of the Florentin Government when the whole frame was changed

yet most of their old Alliances and Contracts were renued still and retained in full force and vigour as well with the States and Princes of Italy as those of other Nations And as for the Hollanders though of late they boggled with us in the main yet they would gladly have renued so much of the old Treaties with the people of England as might have served their own turns not have ingaged them too far the reason why they kept off seems not to have been from any strength of Argument used by this Statizing Pretender but they had a stronger Argument of their own whose Premises and Conclusion lay a long time in Scotland from whence every Post they expected a resolution I shall close all with the testimony of that Learned Spanish Doctor Don Augustin de Hierro Atturney General of the Councel Royal in Spain c. produced by him in his late Charge against the Murtherers of Master Ashcam where insisting upon the point of Friendship betwixt England and Spain he proceeds thus That England saith he should be our Friend in statu quo nunc and that Peace should bee continued with her proceeds from right For Peace is not only made with the King but with the Kingdom also and though the first expires the last remains For put case that Peace be concluded with a Country without including the King either b● carelesness or some other accident yet the Peace stands good For so the Polish Magistrates answered the Emperour Ferdinand the second Faltando el Ray se conservan con el Reyno i. e. the King failing yet Peace is to be conserved with the kingdom So Bodin holds and urgeth a pregnant example to this purpose lib. de repub cap. 4. fol. 63. where he alledgeth the Answer which the Ambassadors of France made to Edw. the 4. King of England desiring aid from France against some rising subjects of his that had driven him out of possession and this desire he pressed by vertue of the League between them Which Answer was that the King of France could not help him in regard the confederations betwixt France and England were made betwixt the Kings and Kingdoms so that though King Edward was dispossessed therof yet the league amity remained stil with the kingd with the King Regnant Just so the Peace 'twixt the Kings and Kingdoms of Spain and England though Charles Stuart the King be wanting yet it may be kept intire with the Kingdom And his Majesty himself insinuates so much unto us continuing still his Ambassador in England For when a Peace is established 'twixt Kings and Kingdomes People Persons and Vassals though the King fail and the Kingdom receive a differing Form of Government yet the Peace holds good still because it aimed principally at the people and persons of both Nations and upon these terms the Peace was renued 'twixt Spain and England in the year 1630. as the French Mercury relates it The Result of all then out of the foregoing reasons testimonies and examples will be undeniably this that Contracts made betwixt States and Princes doe not relate singly and personally to themselves but are made Jure Populi in the behalf and for the good of the Community Though Governors and their Families may fail yet their Treaties are as eternal as the peoples interest which is their moving cause and their ultimate end And therefore as to our particular it must undeniably follow that those former Treaties made betwixt our Kings and the Vnited Provinces belong to us now of right if we please to claim or renue them having been ratified at first in respect only to the people of England No King can lay any claim of this nature but as he is an Officer of the people For that relation being once extinct there remains no Foundation for any future pretences CHAP. IV. THE two former Chapters being as the two Hinges whereupon hangs the main of the Controversie and having therein vindicated the principal points of the peoples interest in England our design in the next place is briefly to refute all the petty falshoods and insinuations which lie scattered here and there in the pretended Answer of our Scottish Pretender That which occurs in the first place is this where hee tells the States of the Vnited Provinces that the Predecessors of the present Governours in England were very inconsiderable in those days when the Treaties were made and that they had neither part nor participation in any of the favours and friendship afforded to the Netherlands This he saith by all circumstances may strongly be presumed A very strong presumption indeed it must needs be till he can name those Circumstances The Parliaments of England which were the Predecessours of our present Governours were not so considerable indeed as now they are and will be we shall easily grant because their glory and freedom was eclypsed by those unbounded Prerogatives which Kings and their House of Peers did usurp unto themselves over the Commons who naturally really and properly were to be esteemed the Parliament because they only sate and represented the people in their rights whereas the Lords sate only in their own rights or rather by vertue of that pretended right which Kings forgetting whose servants they are and for what end they were made had arrogated unto themselves in and over the people This was the reason why the Commons of England became more inconsiderable then by right they ought to have been Yet take them in their most inconsiderable state or in the lowest ebb of their Fortunes and we never see them so low but we find them admitted as partners in enacting of Laws and reputed as principal in granting Subsidies and other Supplies for the necessities and support of the Crown insomuch that no Aid-monies could be required of the people but by the Commons consent In Queen Elizabeth's time they were brought low enough as appears by her strange proceeding against Wentworth that was one of their Members which perhaps had not been so tamely taken from a Prince that had less influence upon their affections yet as low as they were the ancient Treaties betwixt Elizabeth and those Provinces were not made and renued nor were the favours and supplies both of men and money afforded unto that State but in the behalf of the Community out of the Purses of the Commons in whose name and right they were granted so that we leave the world to judge how nearly those Treaties did concern the the Commons and whether they being the undeniable Predecessors of the present Governours in England did not both partake and participate yea and were the Principall Party concerned in those tokens of favour and friendship which were then sont unto the Low-Country Provinces But to fright them from our friendship he tells them a strange Tale How big we are grown with monstrous mysteries of enlarging our Trade and Power 'T is more then probable that England in this new form will improve

proclaimed at Court in their Sermons that All was the Kings no man had any propriety in what he possessed so that the lesse credit is to be given to the Declaration of those pious Ministers as they are called against the Parliament whose partiall testimony is so much applauded by the Resident of Scotland Did Philip of Spain endeavour through his Agent D'Alva to settle his Tyrannies over the Provinces by force of Arms so did the late Tyrant Charls in England first plot a war and then set up his Standard and put the Parliament upon the Defensive as appears by the whole Series of his Councels and Actions whereto more credit is to be given than to his Posthume Book of Meditations which the Resident hath quoted with more affection than discretion Lastly are our Proceedings in England distasted by some of our neighbours through the malice and mis-representation of our English Fugitives So were those of the Hollanders through the malicious subtilty of the Spanish Agents and Ministers who laboured to incense all Christendom and draw the world about their ears till Forain Princes came to have a right understanding of the business So that you see Master Resident might have spared his Milk and Ink too for nec Ovum ovo similius one Egge cannot more exactly resemble another than the case of England in all particulars doth that of Holland in the manner of acquiring our Liberties and Freedoms Now he rails at our judging and beheading the late King and banishing his Family calling it abominable violence and such as the like was never heard of since the beginning of the world Therfore to rectifie the ignorance and malice of himself and his deluded party in this particular some few Instances and Examples shall be here inserted to shew it is no new thing that Kings have been and may be deprived or punished with death for their crimes in Government We read of Amon King of Judah that was slain by a part of the people because he walked not in the way of the Lord and though another part of the people were angry at it and avenged his death upon those that did it yet without question the execution was just according to the Law of God which was without respect of persons that the Idolater should die the death and no doubt the punishment had been inflicted by a Judicial Process had not so great a party of the people been addicted to his ways opposed it which opposition of their is usually the cause in all cases of this nature why Kings are not to be attached as well as other M●●efactors by an ordinary course of Justice Consider Ahab likewise who though he were taken off himself by divine Justice in the battel at Ramoth-Gilead and so escaped punishment by man for his idolatry and cruelty yet it was executed afterward to the full by John upon his Queen and the whole Family who were utterly rooted out and a blessing annexed to him and his heirs that performed the execution But some may say this fact was extraordinary being done by immediate command from God and so not fit for ordinary imitation Yet for Answer it is sufficient I say that it had a Legal ground viz. the ground of Gods ordinary judgement which commanded that all offendors of the same nature should die the death Gods extraordinary command being superadded to his ordinary Law doth as to us rather confirm then weaken the equity and justice of such a proceeding In like manner we read that the whole people took Amaziah King of Judah and slew him for his idolatry whether they did it by a way of Judicial process or not is not material but done it was and if it were done without process then much more are they to he justified that have the courage to imitate such noble acts of Justice by a solemn and serious proceeding The like had been executed upon Joas the father of Amaziah by a part of the people for his Murther and Apostacy Profane stories both ancient and modern are full likewise to the purpose Romultes the first King of Rome was for his tyranny cut in pieces by the Senate and Tarquin their last King was with his whole family cashiered the form of Government changed by the same power and upon the same occasion Many years after Nero the Roman Emperour was sentenced to death by the Senate which was not primum damnati Principis exemplum as the Resident alledges out of Suetonius The Senate being afterward in time cowed down by Heliogabalus their Emperour so that they could not take the ordinary course with him used means by corrupting the soldiery upon whose strength he depended to put him to death The two famous changes made in the Royal line of France depend upon two such noble pieces of Justice executed upon their Kings the first upon Childerick the third King of France who being judicially deposed by the Nobility and Clergy in Parliament the succession was then cut off from the family of Pharamond and confirmed to the race of Pepin till Charls of Lorrain the last of Pepin's race was in the like manner chastised by Parliament and the Crown translated to the successors of Hugh Capet who hold the same to this day though two of them likewise viz. Lewis the third and Charles le Gross have been judicially proceeded against in Parliament And though the people were so tender towards them as not to put them to death yet they were buried alive being mued up within the melancholy walls of some Monastery or else closely confined within the Castle of Orleans In Spain too we read of Suintila Don Alonson the eleventh and Don Pedro judicially proceeded against the first by the fourth National Councel of Toleao the second by publick Act of the Estates of the Realm in the Town of Validolid the third by the Estates of Castile all for their Tyrannical Government The like proceeding also was had against Don Sancho the second of Portugal also against Henry of Poland that was King of France Henry of Swethland Christiern of Denmark and Wenceslaus of Bohemia as also Edward the second and Richard the second of England These last are mentioned by the Resident himself but that which he mainly insists upon is that neither Christiern Wenceslaus Edward nor Richard were beheaded upon a Scaffold as was the late Tyrant Charls However it is sufficient they were judged more worthy of a Scaffold than the Throne and therefore it must needs be more honourable after the late Heroick Example of England that the Judgements of God should be executed in publick before all the world than that they should be stiffled in a Dungeon or the Majesty of them be less'ned by paltry private Assassinations or poisonings acted upon Royall Tyrants and Offenders Even the practise of Scotland it self will furnish us with Examples enough of this nature where no less than fifty of their Kings have been punished with death and the greatest part of

shine forth under the Kingly Government How comes this Answerer to praise the Kings Religion when as himself as well as the rest of his Scots Countreymen have not onely made the first insurrection against the Kings Religion but entred into a Covenant and raised war and at last sold the King for money according to the Kings own published profession Principally against the Kings Religion or against the innovation thereof at least And what the King said further of the Scots Religion and consequently of the Answerers Religion you may read at large in the 14 and 16 Chapters of his printed Book It is well known what harsh and bitter Sermons and Books were made but lately at Breda and the Hague against the Reformed Religon whom they still hatefully termed Calvinists Are there in England divers Sects there are here also not a few God mend it and even as the Governors here would gladly see it otherwise so likewise those in England in the mean time we are assured that in England divers books are forbidden and were burnt by the Hangman which here passe up and downe yet every where The Ambassadors have in the Name and behalf of the whole English Government declared the Conformity of their Religion with ours They tolerate some others and so do we onely we allow more and greater toleration then they Neither we nor they approve of a Spanish Inquisition They do not allow the Church an absolute power of Excommunication no more do we and the Scottish Kirk also was fain to remit it now themselves So that the Presbyterians rage and roaring against Sects and Sectaries is groundless for between themselves and the Independents so named there is not difference in the main of Religion or profession besides Discipline but it should seem the Presbyterian Boutefeus aim at a Papall Power to administer the Jus Clavium at pleasure as the Scots have But their young King hath already taught them another Lesson disapproving thereby also the English Presbyterians It were much to be wished indeed that all men were of one minde that there were but one Religion Our Answerer I believe knows as little how to advise or compass it as others Nay he himself refusing to go to the same Church where the King went during his abode here and the Queen of Bohemia and the Princess Royal and all the Royalists doth thereby sufficiently evidence that there are sects and divisions as well between his party and the Kings as there is between the English and the Presbyterians That which he mentioneth of the good life of his Royal Christians I profess I understand not If by a good life he means a merry joviall life dum vixit vixit bene I yeild that at Court they live more merrie and frollick then elsewhere and thence it is that at London they have put down all the Play-Houses and such like places and practises of profane and scandalous recreation That otherwise the life and fruitfull Conversation of the Royalists should be more holy and exemplary then that of the English Independents as they call them I never heard of before Were they not the Kings evil Councellors his flatterers and seducers whom I return to the Answerer for his Albii Cassii Nigri that made as well the Presbyterians as the rest complaine so much against him from time to time And I pray were not the Presbyterians the first and the onely men that took the King to task The Answerer himself was one of them and of those Covenanters that supplanted the King for his maintaining the Episcopal Hierarchie And when the Presbyterians afterwards went about to introduce the Presbyterian Hierarchie changing onely the Name and maintaining the Substance then said the others whom he calls Independents Soft my Masters we have freed our selves from the Bishops Yoke shall we put our necks under the Presbyterians The Answerer alledgeth some other books which make for him How many other blew books might easily be produced against the same and to his prejudice The King himself complains in his book ch 15. and 21. how much hurt these books did him so that I know not why the Answerer so highly esteems these blew books and that publickly in print too now as well as in the Generall Assembly odiously checking the Soveraign Government here for having begun to treat with the English and presumptuously spreading the same abroad among the Commons as though the Magistrates were regardless of their Office and as if he intended to incense and raise the Commons against the Governors contemning the publick O●dinances in this behalf As for the Successes the Answerer knows well enough that several other Kings Republicks Princes and Potentates had beforehand acknowledged the Republick of England and honored the same with their Ambassies and Credentials And England also sent first unto this State before this State sent to England We have not looked upon the successes but upon the Example of others The Answerer saith that the English th●mselves do disavow the great Turk Again the Gentleman throwes it beyond my reach or he knows not what he avers himself I never heard of any such Disavowing but this I know well on the contrary that all Christian Potentates acknowledge the Turk for what He is and accordingly honor him with their Ambassies The Answerer's King himself scrupled not to send to the Turk no more doth the English Republick Men Laws Governments must every where be taken and used as they are As long as the Answerer and his King are forced to let the Government remain as it is so they must give us leave to do the same The Answerer saith that there is as much difference between the English Government and Liberty and that of ours as there is between Milk and Ink according to the saying of one Salmasius calling him a great Personage Sure the Answerer knows well that Salmasius his Book where he had this crotchet is publickly declared a Libell and scandalous here Do great Personages use to write Libells Furthermore He saith That the Batavians or Hollanders have been a Free Nation from all ages and under the subjection of none Certainly he is a dreaming or else he hath the art to make white black and black white at pleasure or Milk and Ink is all one to him What hath not Holland been under Earls above eight hundred years And lastly under the House of Burgundy Austria and Spain Indeed the Earls were tied to Laws and so were the Kings of England if he say an Earl is no King I answer England is divided in more then fifty Counties or Earldomes so France is divided into many principalities and Counties He that gets the command over them soon gets a Title King Prince Earl or Lord it comes all to one if they have no Superiours But all of them are bound to their Oaths and the Laws Neither in France nor in Spain nor anywhere else are Kings allowed an unlimited power The Examples in France are too fresh

to rehearse them The Kings of Spain have been Earls of Holland and acknowledged no superiors now being freed from Spain there is none appearing that pretend any right to Holland Neverthelesse he was bound to the laws by an oath So that King of England was Earle of Essexshire Sussex Yorkshire and of all the rest compendiously called King of England Scotland Ireland but bound to the Lawes They of Holland perceiving their King had infringed the Laws thereupon they opposed him and fought themselves free Bene feliciter saith the King of Spains Embassador Count Pigneranda pro libertate pugnastis ea vobis debetur The English in like manner perceived their King had trespassed against the laws and falsified his oath whereupon they opposed him til they fought themselves into the same condition of Freedom I could say somewhat more here That the King of England out-did Spain He of Spain had sworn to the Roman Religion and conceived himself bound to protect it according to his Oath but the King of England being sworn to the Protestant Religion is charged to have acted against it innovated it and had he gotten the mastery would have changed it That this Assertion owned as well by the Scots as the English is most true appeares by the Covenant first made by the Scots and afterwards embraced also by the English Look upon Chapt. 14. of the Kings Book see what he saith there himselfe of the Covenant Again the Covenant very expresly shewed that the King had an intent to alter Religion and Laws The Answerer himselfe was a Covenanter and Parliamenteer and blew as fiercely and zealously as any against the Kings designe of Innovation as they termed it The second and third Article of the Covenant speaks very plain And there have been a thousand books written both by the Scots English Presbyterians on that subject Nay the Scots themselves have even since the late Kings death excommunicated all that had and did adhere to the King calling them Engagers and declared them Given over to the Devill And for this cause they put poore Montrosse to death and refused him Absolution And what afterwards the King himself and Hamilton Middleton Lauderdale others of this party have suffered is notorious to all the world Also how this King was fain to do penance and to confess the bloud guiltiness of his Father's House How ever all the difference betwixt the Kings of England and Spain was only this that He of England did more and He of Spain less against the Religion that each of them was sworn to It is well known that the Scots were the first that made a Covenant and thereupon took up arms even as the Nobility heretofore in the Netherlands made a League or Union and took up arms to defend it The Scots having cleared their own Land of all the Royall designs and adherents were not content therewith but proceeded to assist the English who were as eager to be rid of the same incumbrances Which being effected and the King brought to this pass that he saw no remedy left him then he betook himself to the Scots at last his own Country men as confiding more in them Why did not the Scots then take him home along with them They said it was not expedient the King might easily put Scotland into new broils as the English found afterwards among themselves for then broke first out those differences betwixt Presbyterians and Independents the former would have a new Hierarchy introduced like that of the Scots the later would have the Reformed Religion maintained as it now stands among them only they would bear with tender consciences and some others as wee doe likewise here The King of Spain hath given up his Right and acknowledged this a Free State had the King of England done the like or would this King content himself yet with the Scottish Crown as his Fore-fathers did the war would soon be at an end And herein Philip shewed himself more reasonable and righteous then Charls whom nevertheless hee styles that Blessed Martyr so highly wronged and persecuted not remembring at least concealing that they were the Scots who began this violent dealing with him But none of this concerns us not can we help it If the Scots vvill begin troubles and war and the Neighbour Kings and Potentates will wink at it vvhat is that to us What is farther said by the Answerer about the Kings death concerns not us of Holland at all If a King wageth war with his subjects he must needs resolve to run the hazard Kings and Princes are flesh and bloud and mortal as well as others As much might have been done in a Charge by the Sword of a private soldier as was afterwards by the hand of the Executioner The Quality or Majesty of a King or Prince is of no consideration to the steel or lead of the meanest soldier nostro sequitur de vulnere sanguis Majestate nihil contemtius nec infirmius si sint qui contemnant A living Dog is better then a dead Lion A Pesant owner of some Land is better then a King vvithout Land He that vvill not submit himself to the Discretion of a Conquerour should not runne the hazard of being conquered The Conquering party saw no other Expedient no farther trust given even during the Kings restraint there was faction upon faction division upon division insurrection upon insurrection raised The meanest creature the poorest worm seeks for self-preservation How much more a Man If there had been any means left under Heaven whereby a firm confidence could have been recovered it is very probable the Prevailing party would have yeilded to it But to put all their Fortunes Reputation Freedom Life and Being upon a new hazard again no Reason could advise them Now as to the matter of deposing and destroying of Kings it is so common both in England and Scotland that I admire why the Answerer makes it so strange and prodigious But all these things are so largely set forth in printed Boooks and Pamphlets that the Answerer hath little reason to make a wonder of it Omnia jam vulgata To make an alliance with England were unnecessary if our Commerce and Liberties were not in danger We are bound to look to their preservation The Depredations are unsupportable We do not afflict the afflicted but those whom he calls the afflicted afflict us As for the affliction of Joseph we know not what it means unless he make Joseph a Cavalier and under that notion the Scots themselves were the first that persecuted him And that party in Scotland which the Answerer himself doth esteem the honester viz. the kirk party they abhor the Royalists calling them Malignants The English Ambassadors have declared here in their first Proposition they came not out of necessity but to shew they were willing to choose this State for their best friends They have not desired to ingage us against the Scots But it is well known

way and those that are un-armed resolve another then there can be no Government at all but all will be left at random to a continued succession of discontents contests and confusions which must needs end in the ruine of the unarmed party Wherefore it is a Rule with them That the ancient Majesty of a Kingdom or Commonweal continues no longer if it be changed either by a greater Power or by consent of the People where you see Force and Power are put in equall ballance with popular consent in relation to Government And as if it were the best pedigree of Supremacy they define the Supream Authority to be that which holds claim from God and the Sword and therefore is as it were the Authour of its own Original without dependance on any other so that say that every Commonwealth be it never so small which acknowledges no Superiour but God and the Sword hath a right of Majesty or Political Supremacy So saith Besoldus de Juribus Majest cap. 1. Arnisaeus de Majest cap. 1. and Cammonus de Majest Disput 1. Thes 70.75 c. with many others Seeing therefore that an uncontrolable Power of the sword in plenary possession of any Nation instates him or them whos Sword it is w th all the rights of Majesty much more then may they be claimed by the Parliament of England to whom God hath given a commanding Sword which they lawfully hold in the behalf and by consent of the people And therefore questionless no State or Prince where he seeth such an established Power can in reason question those rights or pretend ground not to own the Power as in all other rights so more especially in the right of Ambassy which is one of the fairest Flowers in the Garland of Majesty For as it hath been observed by the Oracle of our Laws 4. Instit c. 26. they and none but they who enjoy the rights of Majesty or Supremacy have a right of Ambassy It must be from a Soveraign to a Soveraign Power and Authority Thus far now our Assertion stands unquestionable therefore for illustration it must needs be much more clear if we consider that the benefit of Ambassy hath been often allowed even to such as were not solely Supream nor in the plenary possession of any Nation Thus in a Nation divided by Civil War where the Supream Power is in Controversie both the Parties are allowed an equal right of Ambassy by Hugo Grotius l. 2. c. 18. Thus in a popular division at Syracusa the one Party within the City sent an Ambassage to the other Party without under the command of Andronodorus The like was done by Caius Manlius one of Catiline's Fellows to Q. Martins and by Brutus and Cassius to Lepidus and Antony Livius l. 14. Salust Catil who give them that were sent the name of Legats which were the same that we now call Agents and Ambassadors Also according to this Rule during the late Contest here betwixt King and Parliament it was that the Hollander made no scruple to entertain Agents equally from both the Parties Nor hath this Priviledge been allowed those only who in National sidings have had some tolerable pretence to a formal Authority but hath been indulged also to meer Out-Laws such as the Montaneers in the Alps the Assassins of old the Pickeroons in France the Banditi in Italy the Tories in Ireland and the Mosse-Troopers in the Marches between England and Scotland Q. Curtius lib. 7. tels us of twenty thousand such Fellows that were got into a Body to make Head against Alexander the Great and it came to a Fight in which Alexander himself being wounded in the Forlorn it came to a Parley Itaque postero die miserunt Legatos ad Regem Whereupon the next day they sent Ambassadors to the King who received them with all Ceremony and caused them to sit in his presence This were the more to be admired but that we find Cesar himself lib. 3. bell civ giving the like honour to those Fugitives that lurked in the Straits and Passes of the Pyrenaean Mountains and affirming it lawful Yet questionless these instances are not to bee drawn into custom but may be imitated and approved only upon the like occasional accidents and emergents of necessity How ever in regard some have openly in Print indeavoured to abridge us in England of our right and interest in this particular it is requisit we should draw the Lines of Ambassy in its utmost Extent and Latitude that our Inferences and Inductions may arise the more easie For if they who upon the occasion of a National Rupture can at the most lay claim to no more but the name of a Party have been and are admitted into a participation of this right by States and Princes and if so bee that an irregular number of Out-Laws and Renegade's formed into a formidable Body have been received likewise into the same Priviledge by the greatest Monarchs then à minori ad majus the Argument must needs hold good as to those in England who are actually and justly invested with the Supream Power and setled in the Noblest form If scattered Recollections of Fugitives Male-Contents and frighted Remnants have assumed this honour to themselves much more may this Noble Nation of England who though she grew old crooked and deformed under the pressures and oppressions of successive Tyrants yet having shaken them off baffled them beyond recovery and setled her self in the condition of a Soveraign Free State seems now to renue her Age again like the Eagle under the sweet Influences of Liberty She is now her self in full possession of her own therefore let the world know in this case she understands that Possession is more then eleven points of the Law For why was it that the late King of England as one observes having sworn a League with the King of Spain expresly also as he was King of Portugal did notwithstanding receive divers Ambassadors from the new King of Portugal yet was not judged either in England or Spain to have broken his former Oath and League Why was it I say but only to shew that Contracts and Oaths made betwixt Political persons are made in a Political sense viz. with a tacit condition of holding their Possessions These being gon their Publick Relations and Concernments immediatly expire How came it to passe that the Spaniard being driven out of the Vnited Provinces and they by him declared Rebels that yet they assuming to themselves a right of Ambassy had their Ambassadors so readily received by Henry of France and Elizabeth of England but that both those Princes well understood the lawfulness of the action and that they had Jure Gentium a right so to send the Spaniard being dispossessed there It was the same reason too that moved the Hollander to entertain Agents and Ambassadors from this State before the death of the Tyrant for that part which we then possessed and since his death for the whole now in possession