be any distrusting of providence nor does it appear that the means in question are unlawful any further than supposing them so makes them so Obs Now you act the Whig to the life for demonstrate a thing never so plainly they 're so obstinate you shall ne'r convince them Herac. They 're very refractory fellows I must confess But have you not something somewhere concerning the Bill of Exclusion's reaching the King Obs Oh yes 't is N. 131. If the Exclusion should pass it would manifestly shew that the Government were outwitted for it would reach the King as well as the Duke Herac. Well I see the King and the Government are still convertible terms with you signifiying one and the same thing But methinks the King is in a fine case betwixt you and the Whigs for that may stand well enough for the House of Commons For they cry the King's person c. cannot be safe without the Exclusion and you that he cannot be safe with it But why do not you prove your assertion as they have pretended to do theirs Obs Why though I do it not in this very place yet look but in the page before and I have done it 'T is but drawing of one Stone out of the building many times that brings the whole fabrick upon your head Just so remove but the Duke and the King cannot stand Herac. But there 's an old rule That similitudes illustrate but do not prove And why should not the King stand though the House fall But now for my part I think the Whigs speak reason for seeing the King is reputed an Heretick by the Catholicks and when he is removed they have hopes of a Popish Successor He is apparently in double danger both as he 's taken for an Heretick and so it may be no sin to murther him and also because in their opinion he keeps a better man from the Crown and one that has more right to it And besides the Whigs still affirm and you dare not deny it that for these reasons there were several that actually undertook the Job and I know not that their designs or principles are yet changed But I care not for medling with these Edge-tools let 's pass to the power and priviledges of Parliament t is safe enough to speak freely there for mortui non mordent Obs As for the power of Parliaments The House of Commons are as much subjects to the King joyntly at severally N. 131. They are made choice of by subjects to represent as subjects Their Commission is Temporary and limited to the Ends for which they were call'd and chosen And those Ends and Powers must be circumscribed by the Qualifications and Capacities of those that chose them for the case is the same as betwixt a Trustee and his Principal N. 135. Herac. The summ of what you say is this That the House of Commons have no more power than those that chose them Now I am not of your mind Nor is there any correspondence between Free-holders and a House of Commons and a Principal and his Trustee For a Principal can both pitch upon the person and limit the Power of his Trustee but so cannot the Free-holders of their Representatives in Parliament For though they elect the Persons yet the Power is from the Law and can neither be enlarged nor abridged by the Electors You know no subject has power over the Life or Estate of his fellow-subject And yet when twelve are elected or nominated by the Sheriff they have a greater power than the King himself in depriving a man of either which they have not from their Elector but from the Law Obs No but they have their power from the King whose Minister the Sheriff is Herac. If we should grant that it would come still to the same thing for the King must owe it to the Law that he can give such a power For if he had it absolutely of himself he might himself adjudge any man to death that he thinks deserves it which you know he cannot do Obs Well but what 's this to the business Herac. 'T is only the very same case For as the King gives the Sheriff power to nominate the Jurors who after their Impannelling have a power which neither he that nominated them gave them nor themselves have singly and apart so by the several Writs directed to be proclaim'd by the Sheriffs Bailiffs c. the King gives the people a power to Elect Members for Parliament who being return'd and assembl'd in the House are by the Law and Constitution of the Government invested in a power which neither their Electors have nor themselves had before they were so assembled They have not such a power indeed as Jurors have but they have a power that is proper and peculiar to them AS they are one of the three Estates in Parliament Obs Well but with all this what kind of power is this these Commons have seeing the King is the SOLE Soveraign and they are only to do their part toward the furnishing of Materials for New Laws where they are Defective N. 135. Herac. The King indeed is a Monarch and that is as much as sole Governour not absolutely but in a limited sence and suo modo He 's sole Governour as to the Administration not sole in Legislation For I do not think the Lords and Commons to be only Labourers to serve up Materials to the King to build new Laws withal but to pursue your Metaphor they are Builders as well as He. Obs How can that be for let them Vote and Pass their Hearts out all signifies nothing without Le Roy le veult or Soit fait come il est desire Herac. 'T is true the King has a Negative Voice but consider it well and 't is no more than what either House have For let the Commons pass a Bill and the Lords can reject it and on the contrary though the rejecting House know that the King so much favour the Bill that he would most certainly pass it into an Act if they would but give their consent to it So that it is evident the consent of either House is as necessary in order to the making of an Act as the King 's is And indeed the usual preface to all Acts evidences this plainly viz. Be it Enacted by the King 's most Excellent Majesty by and with the advice and CONSENT of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and of the Commons in Parliament Assembled and by the AVTHORITY of the same Here you have the Consent and Authority of the two Houses linked with the King 's Seeing therefore part of the power of Making Laws is in the Commons Assembled in Parliament and they have no such power out of Parliament but can then only Obey them 't is plain they are not in all respects as much subjects joyntly as severally unless to make Laws and obey them be the same thing Nor do I know to what purpose you should so much
insist upon this point unless you intend it as a bait to catch some fool with that would be nibbling at the disparaging of the King's Prerogative as you speak in another case of the Plot N. 130. Obs Why that 's the bottom on 't and I hope I shall catch some or other Herac. Well enough for the Power let 's pass to the priviledges of Parliament What do you think of them Obs As to the Power Priviledges and freedom of English Parliaments tell me what it is first and what they are and I 'll give you my Answer The four Inns of Court them selves are not able to determine what they are N. 132. I had rather forty times the King should lay me by the heels without shewing cause for it than a House of Commons and be a Slave to an Imperial Prerogative than to a popular priviledge N. 135. Herac. You were once indeed pretty near being laid by the heels but all the cunning's in catching But what signifies it what you had rather I think there is no necessity to be made slaves either to prerogative or priviledge which are both useful and wholsome enough when they do not exceed their bounds Now seeing neither you nor your four Inns of Court can tell what these priviledges are or upon what they are bottom'd I 'll tell you my opinion I think they stand much upon the same terms with Prerogative part of which is confirmed by express Law and part has no other foundation but Prescription the Kings and Queens of this Realm having exercised such a power in such and such cases time out of mind and this part of the Prerogative I look to be as firm as the other For prescription or Common usage time out of mind is Common Law in all cases Nor is there any reason why the Sovereign should not enjoy the benefit of that Maxime as well as the meanest subject nor why the House of Commons should not enjoy it as well as either 'T is true both Prerogative and Priviledge may be strained too far or something may be call'd so that is not so but shall we therefore deny there are any such things or turn them into ridicule It signifies little what you shall deny to be priviledge or I to be prerogative for I doubt the King will think himself a more competent Judge of the one and the Parliament of the other Obs Let them think what they please but it does not stand with the Constitution of this Government to suppose them to be competent Judges of their own priviledges For it is an abandoning of the very essentials of Church and State to their Mercy What if they should seise upon the Militia the King ' s Magazins and Shipping Levy Arms coin Money c. and tell ye all this is done by priviledges of Parliament It would be no more than what we have seen and suffer'd already under the same pretence Though I do not say that since the damn'd Apostasie of Fourty One and the period of that accursed Train of Rebellions we have labour'd under Many Abuses of that kind N. 135. Herac. Well this Fourty one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excellent at a dead lift 'T is a Fac totum the Philosophers stone a Panaceia 't is good for every thing Now do not poor I Mr. Whig know i' the world what to say But however I am resolv'd to stand to my tackle and see what can be said and will maintain that though the Parliament be held to be the sole competent Judges of their own priviledges this is neither against the constitution of the Government nor do Church and State lye at their mercy for all the Apostasie of Fourty One You will grant me that 't is necessary to all Secular Government that there should be a supreme Power from whence there should be no Appeal and that in Absolute Monarchies this is the Sovereign only but in Limited the highest or supreme Court Obs What I warrant you 'l be for Mr. Prynn's Sovereign Power of Parliaments Herac. No hold there I am not for a Parliament's usurping a Power over the King and invading his Prerogative I only affirm this that beyond the High Court of Parliament there lies no Appeal Obs Well but Appeals are only made to the House of Lords which is a Court of Record and of Judicature but what 's this to the House of Commons Herac. 'T is as much for my purpose to the one as to the other For though they be two Houses they are but one Parliament and have community of priviledges And originally they were but one House This Sir Edw. Cook while he was Speaker of the House of Commons in 35 Eliz. has made out for me At first we were all one House and sate together but the Commons sitting in presence of the King and amongst the Nobles disliked it and found fault that they had not free liberty to speak And upon this reason that they might speak more freely being out of the Royal sight of the King and not amongst the great Lords so far their Betters the House was divided and came to sit asunder A bold and worthy Knight at the time when this was sought the King desiring a reason of this their request and why they would remove themselves from their Betters answered shortly That his Majesty and the Nobles being every one a great person represented but themselves but the Commons though they were but inferiour men yet every one of them represented a thousand of men And this Answer was well allowed of But now though we be divided in Seat be we therefore divided Houses No for if any writ of Error be brought as you shall see a notable Case in 22 E. 3. this Writ must be returned in Parliament that is to the whole House and chiefly to the Upper House for We are but a Limb of the House Never any Man saw a writ returnable in the Lower House Yet I speak not this to take any priviledge from this House for it is certain whatsoever we do sitting the Parliament it is an Act of the whole Court for the Lords without the Commons and the Commons without the Lords can do nothing Vid. Journ of Parl. of Q. Eliz. page 515 516. You see here what unity and consent there is between the two Houses so that one can have no priviledge in which the other is not interested Judgments indeed upon Writs of Errour are given by the Lords but being the Writs are returned in Parliament the sentence is constructively the Commons also unless one would be so absurd as to call the House of Lords the Parliament as some do the House of Commons But to make this plainer yet You know the Upper House has no Jurisdiction over the Lower so as to take cognizance of any thing transacted therein otherwise than by desiring Conference and that the Lower House has as well over the Upper but in both cases it is improperly called Jurisdiction for at
King can do no wrong Obs Yes that I will Herac. Then I say I canot see how his having the advice and consent of Lords and Commons should make him do wrong For to me it seems indifferent as to that whether the King do a thing from his own meer motion and science or by the advice of his Privy Council or of his Parliament Now Sir to do wrong or to do an unrighteous action as you term it are all one Obs Hang 't my mistake was to bring the King into the Argument for if I had only said Lords and Commons I had hit it But now I think on 't 't is not the Pope and Council but the Pope alone that is infallible and if I durst own my self a Papist this would help me to make it out Herac. It would so but the necessity of your dissembling that hinders you from making the best of your Argument However I am sure you are right in that which you instance in That it would be an unrighteous action for the King Lords and Commons to put a Man to death for refusing to swallow forty Thousand Black Bills For no Power in Heaven or Earth can oblige a man to that which is impossible But then what 's this to the Bill of Exclusion or where lies the parallel Obs Now I see you are dull Id possums quod jure possumus The first is naturally impossible and the latter morally The first cannot be done because it cannot and the latter because it ought not Herac. Here are two faults in Logick first transitus a genere ad genus and then petitio principii For you first pass from a moral to a natural action and then you are at your old way of supposing the thing in question But besides this is nothing to the purpose for the dispute was about what the King Lords and Commons could do and now you come to what a man can or can not do For I see nothing to the contrary but the King and Parliament may pass the Bill of Exclusion though a man cannot swallow 40000 black Bills Obs Come I warrant you would tye me up to the Pedantry of the Schools I hate insisting too long upon one thing for that does but confound a man I love a touch and away Herac. Yes Sir you are excellent at that And thus you prove notably That Parliaments are no essential part of the Government for if that were so in the Intervalls of Parliament there were no longer a Government N. 131 And I 'll give you such another The Common Council are no essential part of the Government of the City for if that were so in the Intervalls of Common Councils there would be no longer a Government Now Sir this Argument will not down with Citizens nor yours with any man else For hey'l be apt to distinguish between the Government and the administration of it Now the Government or more properly the Governours are the King and Parliament without whose joynt Authority no Law can be established But the putting these Laws in execution or administration of the Government that indeed is in the Kings hand or such as he will commit it to And till an Order of the King in Council shall be as valid as an Act of Parliament I doubt we shall not get it believed that the King alone is the Government But enough of this In the next place I do not well like your fastning the faults of the King's Ministers upon the King N. 130. Obs Why do you not know the mystery of that I have a double end in it First to get the Libellers punish'd and then to cast the odium of all Male-administration upon the King For you know well enough we care not what scandals and suspicious we draw upon the King so we can but preserve the Duke's esteem And hence I say that the pretended devolution of an ill thing done from the King to his Ministers is as ridiculous as to excuse a man that commits a Murder by crying he was set on ibid. Herac. So then you will have the King responsible both for his own faults and for theirs also that advised him to them This will do the King's business I 'll warrant him And yet it may be very serviceable Doctrine for a Successour as thus All the faults of his Ministers will lye upon him and seeing he cannot be called to account the greatest faults shall pass unpunisht and so no man will be afraid of serving his pleasure and then hey for arbitrary Government However since you are the Champion for the present Government it seeems but a quaint way of maintaining the King's reputation by devolving those faults upon Him that the Whigs are content to fasten upon his Ministers only but you have told me of the policy of it and I am satisfied Obs Well is there any thing else you can object against Herac. How do you make it out that Protestants may not as well exclude a Papist from the Crown as Papists a Protestant Obs Thus Either the Papists do Well in 't or Ill If the former they are not to be blam'd if the latter they are not to be imitated ibid And this Dilemma I defie any Whig of 'em all to Answer Herac. Soft â— little For I think it not hard to make out though the Papists are to be blam'd yet the Protestants may law fully do the same thing Obs Pray let 's hear you for methinks that sounds somewhat odd Herac. My enemy assaults me and endeavours to Murther me that 's ill done in him I kill him in my own defence that 's well or lawfully done by me Obs That 's true but how can you apply this to the Case in question Herac. Thus The Papists are the Assailants who if they can help it will neither let a Protestant King enjoy his Crown nor Protestant Subjects their Estates or Lives Such King and Subjects may therefore lawfully unite and combine for their mutual defence and preservation and make sure of him or them whose prevailing is sure to be their overthrow For if it be lawful for the Subjects to defend the King and Government establish'd and for the King to secure the Estates and Lives of his Subjects I do not see how it should be unlawful to disable or prevent any man from destroying them Inf. Cl. But we must not do ill that good may come of it Herac. Nor we must not do well that ill may come of it if indeed it be doing well to let one cut my King 's mine own and my Neighbours throat when I can hinder it Inf. Cl. Well but we should trust Providence Herac. We should trust providence indeed with a witness if we should believe it would protect us whether we would or no. 'T is as bad to tempt providence as to distrust it For my part I think Miracles are too rare now adayes to be depended on and therefore making use of lawful means I do not take to
Disloyalty Obs Well and are they not so Herac. Yes but truth must not be spoken at all times For can you think that such Accusations are a likely way to perswade the world that we have an esteem for Parliaments or rather do they not confirm any man in the belief of our desire to cast them quite off whiles we insinuate that both the Electors and Elected are so factious seditious and disloyal Then what need was there for you to go about to excuse all the Extravagancies of the Addressers as particularly that snivelling canting complement from Richmond who tell his Majesty that he dislolv'd the two last Parliaments by the inspiration of the special Spirit of God You may guess what Spirit they are inspir'd with by Thompson's Intelligence of May 13. where you see how they refuse to present any Abhorrence of the Association no damn 'em not they How bravely these Fellows deserve your Advocateship And to what purpose was it to touch upon that importune Eulogie of his Royal Highness from Northumberland who call him the Greatest Example of Duty and Obedience to His Majesty Do you think the King has not both entreated him and Commanded him to continue his presence at the Chapel if that would have done Obs Nay then if I must not keep up the Duke's reputation I had has good give over writing Herac. You do well to keep up the Dukes reputation but then it must be by such Instances as are capable of being improv'd to that end as by commending his constancy to his Friends his valour and the like but surely you cannot commend every man from every Topick In the last place you too manifestly grosly pervert the meaning and scope of the Pamphleteer in several places Obs Nay if Vice correct sin we shall have blessed doings Herac. 'T is true my talent lies pretty much that way but then it is when I have to do with a Brooks or the like that 's marcht off the stage and has no body to take up the cudgels for him in such a case indeed I commend it as the only way and that 's the reason your Dissenter's sayings have taken so well But now when you have to do with an Adversary that 's alive and looks out pretty sharp that way will never do Obs Well but where have I so grosly perverted his meaning Herac. I 'll give you an Instance or two When he had said that even Papists might join in a Protestation to defend the Religion establish'd by Law believing Magna Charta to be the firmest Law and Popery to be establish'd thereby what do you but insinuate presently that he calls the Protestant Religion profest at present in the Church of England flat Popery than which nothing is more contrary to the drift of his discourse Thus when he goes about to prove that Kings cannot claim their Crowns by right of Primogeniture from Adam from the frequent changes of Government in the same Nation whereby such lineal succession is every where interrupted and in order to prove this asks In how many Kingdoms has force and violence and the longest sword settled an absolute Monarchy how oft has that yoke been shak't off and the Government turn'd into a Free State How many different Models of both Monarchies and States Are there at This day in the world and yet sayes he none of them that I know of but are and ought to be own'd by the Subjects for Lawful Governments By this you say he justifies Fourty One c. and all Usurpations whatsoever Now who can with any colour draw such a consequence from such premisses He only shows that from the several revolutions of Government that have been in most Nations the claim by primogeniture lineally from Adam is so confounded that 't is impossible to make out any Right that way But does he therefore say that Charles the First had by force and violence and the longest sword settled an absolute Monarchy so that there should be any colour from thence taken to justifie the Usurpation of fourty one The truth is we that are for King's reigning altogether jure divino are forc't to fly to this right of Primogeniâ—ure seeing only paternal Government is Purely of divine original all other Governments having a Mixture of humane policy But seeing it is impossible to determine who is the eldest of the Family in a right line of succession from Adam if that notion should be relied on Princes Titles would be so much in the dark and admit of so much dispute that 't is safer nay necessary to rely on the establishment by humame Law and the sworn Allegeance of the Subjects though the general precepts of the Scripture of obedience to humane ordinances do confirm the duty and obedience of Subjects to their respective Rulers be they Emperours Kings States or of any inferiour kind or denomination But this only betwixt you and me But there is one thing I had like to have forgot the greatest subtilty in all your Observations and that is N. 132. Where by severing the Successor from the Papist you will have the Addresser transport of joy that the Bill of Exclusion did not pass to proceed only out of respect to the former Now Sir if you could distinguish the Popish Successor or Successor and Papist into two Persons as you have done into two notions you would do something but otherwise your Quatenus is somewhat like that of the Bishop's who being found fault with by a Countreyman for living too pompous and luxurious a life so unsuitable to his office answered That he lived not so AS he was a Bishop but AS he was a secular Prince to whom the Fellow repli'd But I doubt if the Prince go to the Devil the Bishop will not stay far behind And 't is believed the Papist will be assoon in the throne as the Successor And therefore that nicety had as good also been omitted Obs Well but there is one point I have handl'd to purpose both N. 132. and 135. that to imagin the death of the Presumptive heir is Treason Herac. Truly Sir you seem not over-confident of what you have done as to that for you say you will not deliever it for Law as a Lawyer but should be glad to be better informed ibid. Now Sir you have been told already that my Lord Cook delivers it for Law as a Lawyer though you will not the contrary that a Collateral Heir is not within the Stat of 25 E 3. that makes the imagining the death of the King 's eldest Son and Heir to be Treason But methinks you are like some Philosophers that undertake to solve Phaenomena that never were in Nature Before you had taken such pains to prove the presumptive Heir to stand upon equal ground with the King's Son and Heir so as to make that which is Treason to the one to be so to the other I say you would have done well to have first made it out that his death was imagin'd For I do not find by any Overt Act that your Adversary has imagin'd any such thing Obs Why has he not call'd him Traytor and protested He shall not Reign over him Herac. Not that I know not of He calls such an one indeed a Traytor as shall murder the King or force him to resign and I think he does not call him out of his name but 't is you that interpret this of the presumptive Heir which if one should suppose to be his true meaning yet would not his protestation that such an one shall not reign over Him be an imagining his death for 't were but for him and his thousands he talks of to slip over into Holland c. and the Protest were made good Obs Well I think I have not said one word but what you have found fault with what would you have me do write nothing and starve Herac. No but keep to your province of translating Erasmus's Colloquies Quevedo's Visions or French Romances these will hold you doing and keep life and soul together And then if you do us no good you 'l do us no harm And for my own part I 'm half in mind to give over also for Ben. Took's fifteen shillings a Week is but poor wages and the Rogue thinks he gives too much too Inf. Cl. Good Gentlemen be not discourag'd for I can assure you your Works are in great esteem amongst us We should not know what course to Steer if we were not guided by you But come 'pray let us adjourn to Sam 's I believe the House begins to fill by this time Obs Herac. I come let 's go FINIS