disposition and temper not to prescribe or necessitate them to any particular form And then consequently it will follow that what lawful Right or Power every King claims is by reason of the constitution of the Government and not from Nature If there be any such thing as this Natural Right it must be inherent in all lawful Kings for if some of them have it why not all of them And if any have every King else has the same And if this be so where was the Natural Right of King Stephen and Henry II both born out of the Realm their Fathers Forraigners and at the same time there were others who by right of descent were nearer to the Crown than either of them It was not this natural right that invented the coronation oath neither is it by reason of it that every King of England is bound to take it before they can require any of their Subjects to do them homage and fealty If there be any such thing as this natural right then it will follow that all the Kings of the earth but one are Usurpers because this natural right must arise from Primogeniture and there can be but one man at the same time who is the rightful Heir and Successor to Adam and consequently all others that pretend to be Kings usurp upon his right So that this notion of a natural right pulls down the thing it pretends to set up When a Common-wealth is changed into a Monarchy is it this natural right that makes him King who is first set up Or when a Family is extinct that has been long in possession of the Crown and the Body of the People chuse a King from amongst themselves is it by this natural right that he attains to this dignity But as a multitude of other absurdities would follow upon it so the Apostle puts the thing out of dispute when he says That Kings are the Ordinance of man And here I will leave Kings to resolve which is their best title whether this natural right or the constitution of the Government Differences and disputes do but too frequently arise betwixt the King and People and therefore I will tell you what I conceive to be advisable when such ill humours are afloat Consider whose demands do best suit the common good For by a serious and impartial examination of that you will be able to discover who is in the right For if you follow this rule exactly it will not misguide you And take this Observation along with you When the State is distempered you will find for the most part if not always that the cause of offence proceeds from the Court. And the reason of it is very evident Because so long as English men injoy their rights they have no occasion to quarrel with the King for they need nothing else But Kings as they are always think they are too short in power and those that are about them are too apt to incourage those desires in Kings because the more absolute he is the more able he is to gratifie his Creatures Now in this case let not the opinion of the Clergy govern you for none are blinder Guides than they and no one thing hath done more mischief in this Nation than their politicks If you happen to be on the prevailing side use your advantage with Moderation This you are obliged to do as you are a good Christian and self-interest pleads for it for since the events of all things are uncertain there may come another turn and then in reason you may expect fair quarter from them whom you treated so well in the day of your power If your Party come by the worst remember these two things First don't think the worse of your Cause by reason of the Success Neither make any mean submission nor do any other sordid thing to get out of your trouble use only lawful and honest means for if you are in the right sooner or later it will prevail and then in the end you will come off with double honour 2. If you are examined as a criminal confess nothing only argue against the insufficiency of what is objected against you For First It is an argument of your courage and resolution Secondly By confessing any thing you help them to evidence against your self and others for you furnish them with time and place and then it is an easie matter for a Knight of the Post to give such an evidence against you as is not easily disproved Thirdly It 's very seldom that you will meet with better usage though you confess never so much unless you will turn accuser of others and give evidence against them which is so base a thing that I would advise you to undergoe any extremity rather than do that For as your own Party will for ever abhor you and your Memory so the other side will despise and slight you as soon as you have done their business and all that you can do for the future will never wipe off such a blot If you are concerned in the prosecution of any publick Criminal let your proceedings be tempered with Justice and Moderation For I have seen it fatal to several who have strained and forced the Law to the destruction of others yet in the end fell into the Pit they digged for others and perished by their own Law When the State is so sore that it makes a Man an Offender for a Word and the times are so evil that the prudent keep silence Then are all meetings to be avoided save only such as are upon real business recreation or for Neighbourly Visits and those too in as small numbers as may be for Spyes and Informers will thrust themselves into Consults and Cabals and of all others will say the hottest and most violent things in hopes that believing that all proceeds from the fervency of their Zeal you may thereby be induced to say something that will bring you within the compass of the Law Or if you have the discretion or good hap to say nothing yet your very being in the same Company where such things have been said or uttered may either make you criminal or at best hand involve you into a great deal of trouble without bringing any advantage to the Cause you do assert And besides he that herds in Cabals must implicitely adhere to the opinion of that Company for by asserting his own Judgment in opposition to theirs though he be never so much in the right he runs the hazard of being reproached for a Spye or Deserter As you ought not to refuse any danger when a proportionable advantage will thereby accrue to the Cause you would support so in such sore times you ought to avoid the doing of any thing unnecessary hot and provoking unless where you or the Cause will reap benefit thereby For young men either through the heat of their years or the instigation of more crafty people are too often prevailed upon to do many things that in
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
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
but told the Parliament to their Face that he had so done and was resolv'd to proceed and he was as good as his word for he made Popish Officers Justices of the Peace and Judges upon which Loyalty began to decline for they fell away from him every day more than other But he stopp'd not here for that he might disoblige the Tories and Clergy as well as he had the rest of the Nation the Papists excepted he set up the High Commission and then the Declaration of Indulgence and for refusing to comply with it he clapp'd up seven of the Bishops in the Tower I am far from detracting from the Praise that is due to that Action of the Bishops yet give me leave to say the Merit of it is not so great as many have cry'd it up to be for they refused to read the Declaration more out of Self-Interest than out of regard to the Publick otherwise why did they not refuse to read the Declaration of Charles II. upon his dissolving the Oxford Parliament which struck more directly at the Heart of the Government than King James did yet not one Bishop refused it and accounted every one disaffected to the Government that did dislike it And that which further prevails with me to be of this Opinion is because some of these Bishops at this time refuse to take the Oaths It would be endless to run through all the Particulars of King James's Exorbitant Reign but in short he had turn'd the Government on its Head and was resolv'd to set up Popery instead of God's true Worship and his Absolute Will and Pleasure in the room of the Law and had fully accomplish'd his purpose if God had not sent us a Deliverer by whose assistance we thrust him from the Throne For having broke his Coronation-Oath and the Condition upon which he receiv'd the Crown he thereby lost all the Right of swaying this Scepter And by a just and real Authority with which the People of England are invested upon such occasions has the Nation by a full and free Consent placed King William on the Throne who I trust will be the Repairer of our Breaches How then ought we to rejoyce what cause have we to be thankful for such a stupendious Change when we had nothing but a fearful looking-for of utter Ruine we now enjoy the Protestant Religion instead of Idolatry and a just and equal Government instead of Slavery and all this brought about without the expence of Blood So that I stand amaz'd when I hear of any that are for recalling the late King James if there be any such I hope I shall not be accounted severe if I wish they were with him for I think it would be best and safest for them and every body else Can any Man be so senceless as to desire to set that man over them again who had once destroy'd their Religion and Liberties and had justly forfeited his Crown by Male Administration for when the King denies his Protection the People are discharged of their Obedience to him because the Obligation of Protection and Subjection is reciprocal Nay I may presume to say that the People have a greater Right to be well govern'd than any King can have to his Crown for their Right of being well govern'd was first in Nature and secondly it is necessary to the being of Mankind but so is it not that this or the other man be on the Throne nor even the form of the Government it self for that sort of Government is most necessary that is best for the Common Good We now fit safely under our Vines and Fig-trees and every man may Worship God without being hawled to a Goal the Bone is taken away that the Papists used to throw amongst Protestants to set them together by the Ears And truly it was always my Opinion that it would never go well with England till every man might worship God in his own way And this being thus happily accomplish'd I do beg your permission to offer my Advice which is this That all Protestants would now unite against the Common Enemy and forbear all Distinctions and Revilings though we may differ in some things yet let us neither reproach him that goes to his Parish Church nor be scandaliz'd at him that goes to a Barn let no man be offended at a Liturgy or set Form of Prayer nor think extempore Prayer is unacceptable to God every Tub must stand on its own bottom therefore let every man be more careful to mind and mend his own Failings than to observe the Faults of others let every man live up to the Doctrine he professes and sincerely act according to his Principles and prefer the publick before any private Interest and then it will go well with them here and hereafter Thus have I given you my scatter'd Thoughts which I have endeavour'd to put together as well as I could with the short leisure I have had As to the particular Business of this day it would be needless to offer you any Directions your Oath has sufficiently instructed you and I suppose most if not all of you understand your Duty as well as I can inform you therefore I will only say that whatever is an Offence against the Law is presentable by you Your Country has reposed a great and honourable Trust in you and I don't doubt your good and faithful discharge of it only this I desire to recommend to you That you will not find any Indictment or Presentment upon Suspicious or slight Evidence for it is unjust unreasonable and may be of fatal consequence to our selves or our Posterity A Man's Reputation is a precious thing and no man ought to be troubled unnecessarily And I do rather give you this Caution because it was the Practice of the Late Times and I hope we shall rather reform their Practices than follow them and come nearer to the Golden Rule of doing as we would be done by But in saying this I don't design to lead you out of the way of Justice that any who have offended the Law should escape Punishment Let the Guilty receive the Reward of their Doings and the Innocent suffer no Wrong and then shall we be a happy People So I will trouble you no further but to pray God to direct you in your Business SOME ARGUMENTS To prove That There is no Presbyterian but a Popish PLOT AND Against the Villany of Informing in 1681. I Will trouble you but with a few words before I proceed to the Particulars of your Charge and I hope no body of the Protestant Perswasion will be offended at what I have to say I have heard it positively affirm'd That 80 81. is become 40 41. That the same Game is now playing that was then If by this is meant That our old and restless Enemies the Papists are now at work that it is they who at this time are labouring our Destruction and that they are the Danger that threatens
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
into Order and frâ— maintaining the Laws and supporting the Government Arbitary Doctrine never did any King good but has ruined many it shook King Charles the seconds Throne and tumbled down his next Successour and tho' such Kings are left without excuse when ruined yet I may say they only are not in fault for their Overthrow is in a great part occasioned by those who Preach up and advise the King to Arbitrary Power Did not other People cocker up and cherish Arbitrary Notions in the Peoples mind tho' such conceptions might sometimes get into his head yet they would never Fructify and come to Perfection if they were not Cultivated by Parasites who make their Court that way in hopes to make themselves great tho' with the hazard of their Masters Crown As it befell K. James whose Male-Administration rendred him unmeet to sway the Scepter and I am very well satisfyed that his Judgment was just for unless a People are decreed to be miserable which God Almighty will never do except thereto provoked by their Sins certainly he will never so tye up their hands that they shall not be allow'd to use them when they have no other way to help themselves Several Artifices were made use of in the two late Reigns for the introducing Arbitrary Power One of which was to insinuate into the minds of the People That the Succession of the Crown was the chief Pillar of the Government and that the breaking into it upon any pretence whatsoever was no less than a Dissolution of the whole Constitution and nothing but Disorder and Confusion would ensue This Doctrine prevailed with many and obtained no less than if the Crown had been settled in that Family by an Ordinance or Decree dropt from Heaven and that every one of that Line or Race had been distinguisht from the rest of mankind by more than ordinary Virtues and Indowments of Mind and Body But we know not of any such Divine Revelation and happy had it been if that Family had been so signal for its Justice and Piety we might then have prayed that there might not want one of them to sit upon the Throne to all Ages How much this Nation is obliged to that Family we very well Remember for the Wounds they gave us are not yet healed Election was certainly the Original of Succession for as the Living more safely and with the freer enjoyment of their Goods was the Original Cause that people Associated themselves into a Nation or Kingdom so for the better attaining that End did they set over themselves the best and Wisest of their Brethren to be their Rulers and Governours and this Administration was trusted in one or more hands according to the temper and Disposition of the People in which Authority they continued either for their Lives or for one Year or some other stated Period of time Where the Government was under a King he usually held it for Life and then upon his decease the People proceeded to a new Election till at last it fell into the hand of some very excellent Person who having more than Ordinarily deserved of his Country they as well in Gratitude to him as believing they could not expect a better Choice than in the Branches that would grow out of so excellent a Stock entailed that Dignity upon him and his Posterity This seems to be the most natural and Lawful rise of Succession I don't deny but some Successions have arisen from force but that was never lasting for that could not subsist or seem lawful longer than there was a force to support it Now those that come to the Crown by the first way of Succession I mean by the consent and approbations of the People does it not plainly imply that they ought to use that power for the good and advantage of their Subjects and not to their hurt and enjoy their Crown only upon that condition no man would ever suffer a Monster to inherit his Estate and Kings are no more exempted from the Accidents of Nature than their meanest Subjects and it is every days practice in private Families to exclude those that will waste their Estate and ruine the Family and if the Reason will there hold good then it is so much stronger in the descent of the Crown by how much the good of a whole Kingdom is to be preferred to that of one private Family Succession is not so very ancient in England as some People may apprehend till the time of William Primus commonly called the Conqueror it was lookt upon as a very precarious Title The next in Succession could reckon very little upon the Crown further than his good Inclinations and Sufficiency to Sway the Scepter did recommend him it being then very common not only to break into the Succession but even to set aside all that Family and Line when ever it was found that the Publick might suffer by their being at the head of the Government the Publick Good being the only Rule and Consideration that Govern'd that point William Primus upon his Death-bed declared that he did not possess the Crown by an Hereditary Right Heary Primus in his Charter acknowleged to hold his Crown by the Mercy of God and the Common Council K. Stephen Henry 2d Rich. Primus and King John all came in by Election so that till Henry 3d. there is scarcely to be found any Precedent of Succession since his time the Succession has been broke into several times and the Crown shifted from one Family to another by Act of Parliament and being so transferred by that Authority is the greatest Proof that can be that Succession is a very feeble Title without something else to support it and I think I may say Defective For says one of great Authority Never did any take pains to obtain an Act of Parliament to settle his Inheritance on his Heirs except he were an Alien or Illegitimate and therefore considering That by vertue of an Intail of the Crown by Act of Parliament in Henry the Sevenths time it is that the four last Kings have swayed this Scepter I could never understand that Divine Right that was by some stampt upon their Title to the Crown or that the Succession was preferrable to the Publick Good I have endeavoured to explain this point the more by reason that some object against the sufficiency of This Kings Title to the Crown because the Succession was broke through to let him into the Throne as if nothing could give a King a good Title to the Crown but Succession For my part I never saw any reason to be of that Opinion and if there be nothing but the Interruption of the Succession to object to this Kings Right if he continue to govern according to the Principle upon which the Crown was given him and according to the laudable Customs of the Realm I think that every man that wishes well to the Interest of his Country ought to bless God for this Revolution
so great draw him aside and then we shall see Peace in our Israel I doubt not Gentlemen but you will do your Parts and this is all that I have to trouble you with at this time THE LEGALITY Of the Convention-Parliament Though not called by Writ IT 's a new sort of Doctrine That where there is a Power to do a greater thing there cannot also be to do a less The Lords who are born Counsellors to the King and Kingdom the Members of the House of Commons were all duely chose by such as had Right to Elect Members for Parliament The two Houses meet at the same day and first declare the Throne vacant and then fill it with this King and Queen and they thus Elected these Lords acknowledge to be our Rightful and Lawful Soveraign Lord and Lady which is the greatest thing that the two Houses are capable of doing and have thereby according to the Maxims of those very Lords altered the Government in a most Essential point of it and yet say they All Subsequents tho' with the Concurrence and Consent of this lawful King and Queen are invallid unless supported by the Authority of this or some other Parliament because the last was not called by Writ in due form of Law So that the Representatives of the Nation Assembled without a Writ can only do one thing and that the highest to make a King And by like Reason If when Assembled by Writ can do every thing but the greatest But it is against all manner of Reason and Policy to suppose that the Power that can make a King cannot do every thing else that is necessary to settle the Government If those Gentlemen had understood the true meaning of Writs and been so ingenious as to confess it they would not have made that an Objection against the Validity of the last Parliament Writs are necessary in their proper time but not so necessary as to give the Essence to a Parliament for if there be any weight in this Reason a Writ is as necessary as the Consent of the Nation by their Legal Representatives to Establish any thing into a Law Writs can amount to no more than the Means by which the Parliament is concerned It will be granted that the present Writ of Summons was Established by the Government and not by the King and it cannot be deny'd that wherever the power of the Government rests it may if it see Cause direct that Parliaments shall be convened in any other manner or by any other means than by Writ For it is not the Writ that makes a man a true Representative but the Election of those who have right to choose for that place For otherwise the Sheriff or other Officer might have return'd whom he saw good and Elections would be needless But the Law has more expresly shewed that it is the Election that makes the Person a Right Member and so consequently the Election of the People is that which gives the Essence to a Parliament because the Law has under greivious pains commanded That Election shall be free And since the Constitution of the Government makes choice of Writs for the Canvening of the Representative Body of the Nation why was not the Parliament as duely concerned and the Acts they passed as good since it was impossible to be Summoned in due form and these Gentlemen might as well have insisted That a Nation may want a Power to help it self as to object against the Validity of the last Parliament because called without Writ By the Weight that they lay upon a Writ they do seem to make a Writ more necessary to a Parliament than our Allegiance is to the Government and if that be so that which is only a Circumstance in the Government is more to be regarded than what is necessary to the Peace of it But to grant that Absurdity What is it that has given the Sanction to these new Oaths that our sitting and Voting in Parliament has not put us under all the Disabilities of 30 Caroli for we are certainly within that Statute if the last Parliament had not power to alter those Oaths and if it had what else they did is as valid for all or none of those Acts are good If it be destructive of the Monarchy to declare those Laws to be good it may be also said to be alike destructive when the proper and only means to support it is made use of For the Nation had no other way left of coming to a Settlement A RESOLUTION OF Two Important Questions I. Whether the Crown of England be Hereditary II. Whether the Duke of York ought to be excluded SIR THE Questions that you have proposed to me are of such a nature that they require a very strict consideration because they are of the greatest moment in our present condition and therefore you have done me a great honour to command my Thoughts upon them in regard you might have had your Queries resolved by persons much more able than I am but since you desire my Opinion I will give it you very faithfully As I remember the first thing that you was in doubt of was Whether the Crown of England be Hereditary or no and to that I answer negatively That it is not Hereditary And in order to the clearing of this I will in the first place give you a short historical account of Matter of Fact till K. James I think it will not be denied that from the first known Times in this Island after that they had Kings till the Conquest but that the People Elected him for their King whom they best liked without regard had to the Issue of the deceased King and also that they deposed them very frequently and set up others in their stead when upon tryal they were found unfit for the purpose He that says otherwise confesses himself either not to have read our English Story or that he understood not what he read and if your self doubts the truth of what I affirm I will at any time give you a particular account of it till the entrance of the Normans William the First commonly called the Conqueror we must begin with him who it 's most certain had no Right or Title to the Crown by Inheritance or Descent and it is as true that he did not gain it by Conquest for Edgar Etheling who was alive and in England when William came in had an unquestionable right by Descent and therefore whilst he was alive William could not pretend any Title by Inheritance but must find out some other way to come to the Crown and therefore he pretended one while a Compact between him and Harold and again That it was left to him by Edward the Confessor by his Will yet he found that all these were but empty sounds for although he had a potent Army by which he might have done great things yet that Army only brought him into England but it was the Election of the People that
affected to prevail with the King to adjourn prorogue and dissolve Parliaments when they were doing thiâ—â—â— of the greatest moment for the Nation and on purpose to defeat those very matters they had in hand If he will adventure to do these things whilst he is a Subject what may we not justly expect from him if he happen to be King But notwithstanding all this some will say That the Word of God will not allow us to put by the next Heir to the Crown be he what he will because by Moses 's Law the next of Blood must inherit Truly I am for that too when we are in a good Breed but as our Case stands I cannot yield to it But under favour I conceive that this Text also obliges no otherwise than according to the constitution of every Government for if the Mosaick Law be our Direction then the Duke will be King of a third part of these Dominions before his Brother is dead for by that Law the Eldest was only to have a double Portion and no more and then I pray what Absurdities will follow upon this Doctrine But it is most plain that this Law related only to private Families and had no regard to the setting up or pulling down of Kings for when the Law was given the Children of Israel had no King nor any prospect of it and it was several Ages after that before they petitioned God for a King and Saul was the first and the Practice after Saul puts the Matter out of Controversie for when Saul was dead David was anointed though there remained several of the Seed of Saul After David Solomon was anointed tho' Adonijah was his elder Brother and his Mother the honester Woman of the two When Solomon was dead Jeroboam rent away ten Tribes from Rehoboam and so on But these Instances are sufficient to prove that the Israelites did not believe that they were obliged to chuse him for their King that was next of Blood And if they might do this who had the presence of God amongst them and his immediate Direction more than any other People certainly then we cannot be said to sin against the Light And besides in all private Families there is care taken to preserve the continuance of them by disinheriting the eldest Son when it is perceived that he will ruine the Estate if he be ever possessed of it but to this some will answer That it is seldom seen that ever any Family prospered long where the right Heir was set aside I think so too when the right Heir is deprived of his Birthright for no just cause but we find that several Families have continued many Generations after that the right Heir has been rejected and yet tho' an ill Fate should always attend that Family where this is done yet is it not better to continue it two or three Successions longer tho' with a certainty of Ruine at last rather than suffer it to come into the Hands of him who will in a few years perhaps months bring it to nothing You cannot but have heard of Maud the Empress who was Daughter to Henry I. what Trouble and Bloodshed she caused in England in the days of K. Stephen and this is often insisted on to shew what evil Consequences there will follow upon secluding the Duke It is true she made a great bustle but she had that to pretend which the Duke has not for the Nation had taken an Oath to her in the life-time of her Father and from that she might presume very much but the Conditions were not performed upon which the Oath was taken and therefore the Obligation was void and the People were at liberty to chuse whom they pleased But besides whether the Duke get the Crown or no much Blood must be spilt for we must either fight or burn and whether it be not better to exclude the Duke by a Law and adventure our Lives in defence of that and all our Laws and Religion into the bargain than to let him come to the Crown and at best hand hang up Thousands of worthy Men if he do not extirpate their Name and Families but to be sure all those who gave their Votes to the Bill nay all that have declared their Approbation of it and all their Friends and Relations are destin'd by him and the Pope for Destruction if not all them who voted to elect them Members of Parliament And how far this will extend let any man consider Sir I am now come to your last Doubt which is How far we ought to obey the Duke if he happen to be King and there be no Law I mean no Act of Parliament to exclude him This is truly a tender place and ought to be handled only in the Parliament House but because I dare trust you in this captious Age I will lay before you some things that I think cannot be denied It is a known Maxim in our Law That protectio trahit subjectionem subjectio trahit protectionem These are plain words and are of as clear a sense that is not equivocal or capable of a double construction and I take them to be the mutual Bonds between a King and his People and one introduces the other and they cannot be separated for if Protection draws after it Subjection and Obedience incites Protection then whether or no can there be Protection where there is no Subjection or can there be Obedience where there is no Protection and then if it be not done on the one part how can it be required from the other for if the King shall go about to destroy the Government or take away our Properties does he not disown us and deny us his Protection and then I pray what Obedience is due to him that regards us not Or if the Subjects shall not obey the King's Writs or other Commands which by Law he may require from them do not they disown him and forbid him to concern himself with them and then I pray what has he to do but to do to them as they have done to him And this will be the case should the Duke being a Papist come to the Crown We see already that his Inclinations are for our Destruction and besides his Religion obliges him to it and therefore what Protection can we hope to have from him whose Conscience and Desire are united for our Ruine for it is not in the power of a Popish King to preserve us for if he will protect us and the Pope command our Destruction he must either violate his own Conscience or give us up to Ruine So dangerous a thing it is to depend upon the Conscience of a Papist who cannot be tyed or obliged by any Oaths or Obligations and it is safer to have a Protestant King tho' he has no Morality rather than to live under a Popish King tho' he be the best Man living Altho' I have heard many say How came it to pass that we retain'd our Properties