interpreters of both Laws as namely the Glossographer Iohan. Andreas Hostiensis Collect. Pet. Anchoranus Antonius Imola Card. Florentinus Abb. Panormitanus Oldradus Albericus Angelus Felinus Paul Castrensis Alexander Barbatius Franc. Curtius Guido Pape Card. Alexander Philip. Francus Iason Philippus Decius Carol. Ruinus Anto. Corsetta Ripa Calderine Alciate and many other of somwhat more ordinary name Who all with full voice do agree that in Kingdoms and other dignities â—hich cannot be either valued or divided but they are dismembred the eldest Son doth entirely succeed And this many of them do call the Law of all Nations derived from the order of nature and from the institution of God and confirmed by the Canon civil and other positive Laws For the Succession of Children is one of the primary precepts of nature whereby his mortality is in some sort repaired and his continuance perpetuated by his posterity But among all the Children nature seemeth to prefer the first born by imprinting in the mind of parents the greatest love and inclination towards them as divers of the authors before alleaged do affirm and as it may appear by that of the prophet Zacharie and they shall lament over him as men use to lament in the death of their first born and likewise by that which is said of David that he would not grieve his Son Ammon for that he loved him because he was his first born Hereupon Lyra and before him Saint Augustin and Saint Chrysostom do affirm that the last plague of the Egyptians which was the death of their first born was the most sharp and heavy unto them For nothing saith Saint Augustin is more dear than the first born Aristotle Plinie Aelian and Tzetzes do write that the same affection is also found in certain beasts And to this purpose is that which Herodotus reporteth that when the Lacedaemonians had received an oracle â—hat they should take for Kings the two sons of Aristodemus and Aegina but give most honor unto the eldest and they were ignorant which was eldest because the Mother and the Nurse refused to declare it they observed which of the children the mother did wash and feed first and thereby found out that Eristhenes was the eldest Lucian citeth the love of the first born as grown into a proverb Gregorie Nazianzene saith that all men have a sense thereof Saint Ambrose writeth that in this respect God called the People of Israel his first born for that they were not most ancient but best beloved Lastly S. Chrysostome affirmeth that the first born were to be esteemed more honorable than the rest And this natural precedence both in honor and in favor seemeth to be expresly ratified by God first where he said unto Cain of his brother Abel His desires shall be subject unto thee and thou shalt have dominion over him according to which institution when Iacob had bought his brothers right of birth Isaac blessed him in these words Be Lord over thy Brethren and lâ—t the sons of thy mother bow before thee Secondly where he forbiddeth the Father to disinherit the first Son of his double portion because by right of birth it is his due Thirdly where he maketh choice of the first born to be sanctified to himself And whereas God hath often preferred the youngest as Abel Isaac Iacob Iuda Phares Ephraim Moses David Solomon and others it was no other than that which Christ said that many that were last should be first and that which Saint Paul hath delivered that God hath chosen the weak and base and contemptible things of this world least any flesh should glory in his sight So hath Herodotus written how Artabanus the Persian in a complaining manner did confess that God delighted to depress those things that were high But if the first born dye before succession fall or if being possessed of the Kingdom he dye without issue his right of birth devolveth unto the next in blood and if he dyeth in like manner then unto the third and so likewise to the rest in order This is affirmed by Albericus and may be confirmed by that which Baldus saith that succession hath reference to the time of death and respecteth the priority which is then extant And again He is not said the first born in Law who dyeth before the fee openeth but he who at that time is eldest in life And this opinion is embraced by Alciate because as Celsus saith Primus is dicitur ante quem nemo sit He is first who hath none before him Iaco. Aretinus Cinus Albericus and Baldus do form this case There is a custom that the first born of the first marriage should succeed in a baronny a certain baron had three Wives by the first he had no Children by the other too many the first son of the second marriage shall succeed Because as the glossographer there saith the second marriage in regard of the third is accompted first Baldus doth extend it further that if he hath a son by the first marriage and he refuse the barony the first son by the second marriage shall succeed in his right and so he saith it was determined in the Kingdom of Apulia when Lewes the Kings eldest son was professed a friar And this decision is allowed by Alexander Oldradus and Antonius Corsetta and is proved by plain text of the Canon Law both where the second born is called first born when the first born hath given place and also where he is called the only son whose brother is dead But because it is a notorious custom that the nearest in blood doth succâ—ed altho perhaps removed in degree I will labor no more to load it with proof for who will proclaim that the sun doth shine But if we should now grant unto you which is a greater courtesie than with modesty you can require that no particular form of Government is natural what will you conclude thereof what inference can you hereupon enforce That thâ—re is no doubt but the People have power to choose and to change the fashion of Government and to limit the same with what conditions they please What Sir can you find no third But that either one form of Government is natural or that the People must always retain such liberty of power Have they no power to relinquish their power Is there no possibility that they may loose it Whether are you so ignorant to think as you speak or so deceitful to speak otherwise then you think There is no Authority which the People hath in matters of state but it may be either bound or streightned by three means The first is by cession or grant for so the Romans by the Law of royalty yeelded all their Authority in Government to the Prince Of this Law Vlpian maketh mention and Bodin reporteth that it is yet extant in Rome graven in stone So the People of Cyrene of Pergame and of Bithynia did submit themselves
Agesilaus also the famous King of Lacedaemon was lame as Plutarch and Probus Aemilius do report Paul Orosius saith that the Lacedaemonians did choose to have their King halt rather than their Kingdom Heredotus also writeth that after the death of Codrus King of Athens Medon his eldest son and Neleus the next did contend for the Kingdom because Neleus would not give place to Medon who was by reason of his lame legs if not unable yet unapt to govern The matter being almost brought to the sentence of the sword it was mediated between them that the controversie should be decided by the Oracle of Apollo Apollo was consulted by whose Judgment Medon was declared King Iosephus 1 hath left recorded that Aristobulus and Hircanus after a long and cruel contention for the Kingdom of Jury made Pompey the Judge of that right which by arms they were unable to decide Hircanus alleaged that he was Eldest brother Aristobulus excepted that Hircanus was insufficient to govern a Realm Hereupon Pompey gave sentencè that Aristobulus should give over the Kingdom which he did usurp and Hircanus be restored to his Estate The like Judgment doth Livy write that Annibal gave for the Kingdom of that Country which is now called Savoy restoring Brancus unto his right from which he had been by his younger brother expelled And although Pyrrus did appoint that Son to succeed whose sword had the best edge yet was the eldest acknowledged who bare the least reputation for valour Lisander moved the Lacedaemonians to decree that the most sufficient and not always the next in bloud of the line of Hercules should be admitted to the Kingdom yet Plutarch saith that he found no man to second his advise I will add an example of later times Ladislaus a man more famous for the sanctity of his life then for his Kingdom of Hungary left by his brother Grisa two Nephews Colomannus the elder who was dwarfy lame crook-backt crab-faced blunt and blear-eyed a stammerer and which is more a Priest and Almus the younger a man free from just exception Yet these respects set aside a dispensation was obtained from the Pope and Colomannus notwithstanding his deformities and defects was accepted by the people for King Girard writeth that the custom of the French was to honour their Kings whatsoever they were whether foolish or wise able or weak esteeming the Name of King to be sacred by whomsoever it should be born And therefore they supported in Estate not only Charls the simple but Charls the 6. also who raigned many years in open distemperature and disturbance of mind So you see that the practise of many Nations have been contrary to your conceit and that the interpreters of the civil and Canon Law good arbitrators of natural equity either bare against you or stand for you only when disability is natural adding further that if the excluded successor hath a Son before or after succession doth fall free from any such defect the right of the Kingdom descendeth unto him This affirmeth Baldus Socinus Cardinal Alexander and before them Andreas Iserna Because the Inability of Parents doth not prejudice the Children especially in regard of their natural Rights neither is it any impediment wherefore they should not enjoy either priviledge or dignity from the person of their Grand-father Magis est saith Vlpian vt avi potius dignitas prosit quam obsit casus patris It is fitter that the Son should receive profit by the dignity of his Granfather then prejudice by his Fathers chance And this we may think is a reasonable respect wherefore other interpreters have not allowed their principal opinion in repelling him who is disabled by birth For if another be once possessed of his place it will be hard for any of his Children to attaine their right Whereupon disunion factions Wars may easily arise It is inconvenient I grant to be governed by a King who is defective in body or in mind But it is a greater inconvenience by making a breach in this high Point of State to open an Entrance for all disorders wherein ambition and insolency may range at large For as mischief is of that Nature that it cannot stand but by supportance of another Evil and so multiplyeth in it self till it come to the highest and then doth ruine with the proper weight So minds once exceeding the bounds of obedience cease not to strengthen one boldness by another until they have involved the whole State in confusion We find that Gabriel the youngest brother of the House of Saluse kept his Eldest brother in close Priâ—on usurped his Estate and gave forth for satisfaction to the People that he was mad I could report many like Examples But I shall have occasion to speak more hereof in the further passage betwixt us After this you conclude three points 1 That inclination to live in company is of nature 2 That Government and Jurisdiction of Magistrates is also of nature 3 That no one particular Form of Government is natural for then it should be the same in all Countries seeing God and Nature is one to all But before I joyn with you either in contradiction or consent it shall not be amiss to declare briefly what we understand by the law of nature and by what means it may 〈◊〉 known God â—n the creation of man imprinted certain rules within hiâ— soul to direct him in all the actions of his life Which rules because we took them when we took our Being are commonly called the primary Law of Nature Of which sort the canons accompt these precepts following To worship God To obey Parents and Governors and thereby to conserve common society lawful conjunction of man and woman succession of children education of children acquisition of things which pertain to no man equal liberty of all to communicate commodities to repel force to hurt no man and generally to do to another as he would be done unto which is the sum and substance of the second table of the decalogue And this Law Thomas Aquine affirmeth to be much depraved by the fall of man and afterwards more by error evil custom pertinacy and other corrupters of the mind and yet doth it yield us so large light that Saint Paul did esteem it sufficient to condemn the Gentiles who had no other Law written Out of these precepts are formed certain customs generally observed in all parts of the World which because they were not from the beginning but brought in afterward some as a consequence or collection others as a practise or execution of the first natural precepts are called the secondary Law of nature and by many also the Law of Nations Gaius ' saith that which natural reason doth constitute among all men is observed by all alike and termed the Law of Nations and the same is called by Iustinianâ— the Law of Nature Cicero likewise saith the consent of all Nations is to
be esteemed the Law of Nature But this is to be taken not as though all Nations have at any time observed one usage alike it is not necessary saith Baldus that the word all should carry so large a sence neither hath it ever been brought into knowledge what customs all Nations have held in use And it is most certain that there is not one point or precept of the Law of Nature but by reason partly of the weakness partly of the corruption which the fall of Adam did fasten in his posterity some people have at all times either neglected or else depraved some being so dull as they could not perceive others so malicious as they would deny that which nature did lay before them Yea such is either the weakness or wilfulness of our judgment that they who are not only admitted but admired for wise men do many times disagree in determining what is most agreeable to nature much less may we either expect or imagine that all Nations so different so distant never so much as now and yet not now fully discovered should jump in one Judgment for uniform observation of any custom neither is that no natural Right as Zenophon noteth which many daily do transgress And therefore Donellus did unjustly reject the discription which Gaius gave of the Law of Nations by taking the word all in the amplest sence S. Ambrose and S. Hierom did in this sort declare it that we are to take that for a Decree of Nations which successively and at times hath been observed by all But as for any one time as it is to be judged the decree or custom of a whole City which hath passed by consent of the most part although all have not allowed and some perhaps have opposed against it so is it to be esteemed the Law of Nations the common Law of the whole World which most Nations in the World are found to imbrace And because Government was not from the beginning but induced as a consequence of the primary Precept of Nature to maintain human Society therefore whensoever we speak of natural Government we are intended to mean the secondary Law of Nature which is the received custom successively of all and always of most Nations in the World Out of this we may gather that three rules do chiefly lead us to the Knowledge of this Law The first is that which Cicero in the like giveth to appeal vnto sence because there is no man but by the light of nature hath some sence of that which nature doth allow S. Augustine saith I know not by what conscience we feel these things and likewise Tertullian Nature hath tainted all Evil either with fear or shame Whereto agreeth that which S. Ambrose saith although they deny it they cannot but shew some tokens of shame Hereupon the authors of the civil Law do reject that for unjust which is not demanded withouâ— shew of shame For as Cassiodorus writeth God hath given all men such a sence of justice that they who know not the Laws cannot but acknowledge the reason of truth But because this light of nature in many men is exceeding dim the next rule is to observe what hath been allowed by those who are of greatest both wisdom and integrity in whom Nature doth shew her self most clear For as Aristotle saith that is probable which proved men do approve Among these the first place pertaineth unto them who by inspiration of God have compiled the Books of holy Scripture to whom as attendants we may adjoyn the antient Counsels and Fathers of the Church The next place is to be given to the Authors of the civil Law whose Judgment hath been these many hundred Years admired by many approved by all and is at this day accepted for Law almost in all states of the Christian common-wealth To these also we may adjoyn as attendants their interpreters of most approved note The third place is due to Philosophers Historigraphers Orators and the like who have not unprofitably endeavored to free nature of two clouds wherewith she is often overcast gross ignorance and subtil Error But because natural reason as Alciate affirmeth doth sometimes vary according to the capacity of particular men even as the Sun being in it self always the same giveth neither heat nor light to all alike the third rule followeth to observe the common Use of all Nations which Cicero calleth the voice of Nature because as Aristotle hath written it is not done by chance which every where is done Plato saith this shall be the proof hereof that no man doth otherwise speak likewise Baldus I dare not disallow that which the World alloweth And in this common Law or Custom of the World three circumstances are to be considered antiquity continuance and generality Now when your first position is so clearly true that you do but guild Gold in labouring to prove it for man is not only sociable by nature but as Aristotle affirmeth more sociable than any other living creature These notorious points the more we prove the more we obscure Your second is also true for as Tully saith without Empire neither House nor City nor Nation nor Mankind can stand nor the Nature of all things nor in a word the World it self Whereto agreeth that of Aristotle Government is both necessary and also profitable But whereas you bring in proof hereof that there was never People found either in antient Time or of late Discovery which had not some Magistrate to govern them neither is it necessary and yet false It is not necessary to have so large a consent of Nations as I have declared before and it is false that in all Times and Nations there have been Magistrates After the deluge Magistrates were not known until Kings did arise as hereafter it shall appear The Jews were often without either Magistrates or Government Whereupon in certain places of the Book of Judges it is thus written In those days there was no King in Israel but what seemed right to every man that did he Sometimes Democratical Government doth draw to a pure Anarchie and so doth the interregnum of elective principalities Leo Afer reporteth that in Guzala a country of Africk the people have neither King nor form of Government but upon days of mart they elect a Captain to secure their traffick The same Author delivereth that the inhabitants of the Mountain Magnan upon the frontiers of Fez have no form of common wealth but do stay travellers unpartial judges to decide their controversies Leo himself was arrested to be their judge and when he had spent many days in determining their debates he was in the end presented with hens ducks geese and other of their country commodities which served only to discharge his host And if this your reason should be of force then were not sociability natural because many men have made choice to live alone But how then
affirmeth that they are cherished by God Your self do shew out of Aristotle Seneca Plutarch S. Hierome S. Chrysostome and S. Peter that Monarchy is the most exeellent and perfect Government most resembling the Government of God and most agreeable unto Nature But what do you mean to acknowledge all this and yet to deny that Monarchy is natural do you take it to be above Nature or how else is it most excellent and perfect how is it most agreeable to Nature and yet not natural can any Action be most agreeable to Justice and yet not just I know not by what stratagem or cunning crank of the Schools you can be made agreable to your self But now if we consider the general custom of all people we shall find that all the antient Nations in whom the Laws of Nature were least corrupt had no other Government as the Assyrians Medes Persans Parthians Indians Scythians Sirians Phaenicians Arabians Aegyptians Africans Numidians Mauritanians Britans Celtes Gaules Latines Hetruscanes Sicilians Athenians Lacaedemonians Corinthians Achaeans Sicyonians Candians and in one word all Tullie saith it is certain that all antient Nations were under Kings with whâ—ch opinion Salust consenteth and Iustine also where he saith the Empire of Nations at the first was in the Hands of Kings And when the People of Israel desired a King they alledged that all other Nations were governed by Kings The Athenians were the first as Plinie affirmeth who set up the Government of many whose example certain other Towns of Greece did follow rather blinded by ambition then led by Judgment Among these if the highest Authority were in the least part of the Citizens it was called Aristocracy if in the most or in all it was termed Democracy wherein you confess that neither they did nor could any long time continue but after many Tumults Seditions Mutinies Outrages Injusticies banding of factions and inundations of blood they were in the end either dissolved or vanquished and reduced again under Government of one The state of Rome began under Kings it attained the highest pitch both of Glory and Greatness under Emperors in the middle time wherein it never inâ—oyed x. years together free from sedition Polybius saith that it was mixed the Consuls representing a Monarchy the Senate an Aristrocacy and the common People a Democracy which opinion was likewise embraced by Dionysius Halicarnasseus Cicero Cantarine and others But many do hold that the State of Rome at that time was popular which seemeth to be confirmed by the famous Lawyer and Counseller Vlpian where he saith that the People did grant all their Power and Authority to the Prince Whatsoever it was in show in very deed it was always governed by some one principal Man Livie writeth of Scipio that under his shadow the City was protected and that his looks were in stead of Laws and likewise of Papirius cursor that he sustained the Roman affairs So said Thucidides that Athens was in appearance popular but Aristides was the true Monarch thereof and Plutarch also affirmeth that Pelopidas and Epaminondas were no less then Lords of the popular State of Thebes but after the death of these Men both the States of Athens and Thebes floated in Tumults as the same Author observeth like a ship in a Tempest without a Pilot. So did Peter Sodarine â—onfalonier of Florence give forth that the title of popularity was used as a mask to shadow the Tyranny of Laurence Medices but florence did never so flourish both in honor wealth and quiet as under that Tyranny Also in actions of weight in great dangers and necessities the Romans had recourse to one absolute and supreme Commander which Livie calleth the highest refuge whose Authority as the Romans did most reverently respect so was it many times fearful to their Enemies Of the first Livie saith the Dâ—ctators edict was always observed as an Oracle of the second so soon as a Dictator was created such a Terror came upon the Enemies that they departed presently from the walls Likewise in cases of extremity the Lacedemonians had their high Governor whom they called Harmostes the Thessalonians had their Archos and the Mytileans also their great Aezymnetes Lastly Tacitus reporteth that certain wise men discoursing of the like of Augustus after his death affirmed rightly that there was no other mean to appease the discords of the state but by reducing it under the Government of one Let us now take a view of our present age In all Asia from whence Tully saith civility did first spread into other parts of the World no Government is in use but by a Monarch as appeareth by the Tartarians Turks Persians Indians Chinans and Catajans no other Government is found to be founded in all the Countries of Affrick in America also and all the west parts of the World no other is yet discovered Europe only upon either declining or change of the Empire a few Towns in Germany and Italy did revive again the Government of many some are already returned to a Monarchy and the residue in their time will do the like even as all others have done which have been before them What then shall we say of this so antient so continual so general consent of all Nations what can we say but conclude with Tertullian these testimonies the more true the more simple the more simple the more common the more common the more natural the more natural the more divine But because ambition is a most fiery affection and carrieth men blindfold into headlong hopes whereby many do aspire to bear rule neither they good nor with any good either means or end the Custom or Law of Nations hath by two Reigns endeavored to keep in this raging desire by succession and by election And yet again because election is most often if not always entangled with many inconveniences as first for that the outragies during the vacancy are many and great every one that is either grieved or in want assuming free power both for revenge and spoile Secondly for that the bouldest winneth the garland more often than the best because the favor of the People doth always tast more of affection than of judgment Thirdly for that they who do not leave their state to their posterity will dissipate the demain and work out of it either profit or friends for so we see that the empire of Germany is pluckt bare of her fairest feathers Fourthly for that occasions of war are hereby ministred and that either when one taketh his repulse for indignity upon which ground Francis the first King of France could never be driven out of practise against Charles the 5. emperor or else when by means of factions many are elected as it happenâ—d in Almaine when Lewes of Baviâ—r and Albert of Austria were elected Emperors whereupon eight years war between them did ensue and as it often happened in the Empire of Rome when one Emperor was chosen by the Senate and another
by the Soldiers and sometimes by every legion one whereby such siers were kindled as could not be quenched without much blood For these wars are most cruelly executed because the quarrel leaveth no middle state inter summum praecipitium between the highest honor and the deadliest downfall For these and divers other respects it hath been observed at most times in all nations and at all times in most that the royalty hath passed by succession accoâ—ding to propinquity of blood We read that â—tolomy who after the death of Alexander the great seazed upon Aegypt and part also of Arabia and of Africk lest that state to his youngest son but Trogus said and out of him Iustine that it was against the Law of Nations and that upon this occasion one of them did work the death of the other And therefore when afterward Ptolomy surnamed Physcon at the importunity of his Wife Cleopatra would have preferred his youngest son to the succession of his Kingdom Iustine saith that the People opposed themselves against it but Pausanias more probably affirmeth that they reversed his order after his death The same course was held in Italy by the Hetruscanes Latines and those Albanes from whom the Romans took their original Livy writeth that Procas King of the Albanes appointed Numitor to succeed in his estate but Amulius his younger brother did usurp it by force hereupon Dionysius Halicarnasseus saith that Amulius held the Kingdom against right because it appertained to his Elder brother Among the Graecians during the space of six hundred Years wherein they were governed by Kings we find but Timondas and Pittacus who were elected the one of Corinth the other of Negropont the residue held their states by order of succession as Thucidides affirmeth encountring therein the opinion of Aristotle Livy writeth that Perseus King of Macedon said that by the order of Nature the Law of Nations and the ancient custom of Macedony the eldest son was to succâ—ed in the Kingdom Diodorus Siculus and Iustine do report that by this custom Alexander succeeded his father Amyntas before his yonger brother Philip. Herodotus declareth that the same order was observed among the Trojans affirming that after the death of Priamus the Kingdom was not to devolve unto Alexander because Hector was before him in years The same also doth appeare by that which Virgil writeth Praeterea Sceptrum Ilione quod gesserat olim Maxima natarum Priami The Scepter which Ilione when she the state did stay The first daughter of Priamus with royal hand did sway Out of which place Servius Maurus doth collect that women also did use to govern But more plainly this custome of the Troians doth appear by that which Messala Corvinus writeth that Trojus had two sons Ilus and Assaracus and that Ilus by priviledge of his age succeeeded in the Kingdom The Persians also who for a long time held the reins of all the nations near unto them had the same order of succession as Zenophon witnesseth which is also confirmed by two famous histories one between Artaxerxes Cyrus whereof Plutarch maketh mention the other between Artabazanes Xerxes reported by Herodotus and Iustin wherein Artabazanes alledged that it was a custom among all men that the eldest son should first succeed Agathocles out of him Athenaeus do write that the Persians had a golden water for so they term it whereof it was capital for any man to drink but only the king and his eldest son Whither this water were drawn out of the River Euleus which invironeth the Tower Susis and the Temple of Diana whereof Pliny writeth that only the kings of Persia did drink or whether of Choaspis whose waters Herodotus doth report to have bin boiled and carried after the king in silver vessels or whether both these were one River I will neither determine nor discourse In Siria which is called Assiria as Herodotus writeth and also Phoenicia Palestina and Mesopotamia as appeareth by Pliny Eusebius and divers other the same custom is proved by that which Iustine and L. Florus do write that Demetrius having bin delivered by his brother Antiochus King of Siria for an hostage to the Romans and hearing of the death of Antiochus declared to the Senate in open assembly that as by the law of nations he had given place to his elder Brother so by the same law the right of succession was then cast upon him The Parthians who being thrice attempted by the Romans in the time of their chiefest both discipline and strength were able to bear themselves victorious did always acknowledge for their king the next of the blood of their first King Arsaces Among the Germans also who were of force to defeat five consulare armies of the Romans Tacitus affirmeth that the eldest Son did intirely succeed only the Horses did fall to the most valiant And that this was likewise the custom of the Iews it is evident by the whole History of their Kings especially where it is said that Ioram succeeded Iosaphat and the reason added because he was the eldest I should but burn day as the saying is in running further upon particulars Herodotus doth advow it to be a general custom among all men that the first in birth is next in succession Certain ages after him S. Hierome said that a Kingdom is due unto the eldest In late ages our selves may see that the Tartars Turks Persians and all the Asiaticks have no other form of constituting their Kings No other is followed in all the Countries of Africk In the west Indies no other is yet discovered Insomuch as when Frances Pizarre in the Conquest of Peru had slain Atibalippa the King thereof the people brake into shew some of joy all of contentment because he had made his way to the Kingdom by murthering of his Elder brother In Europe it is not long sinâ—e all the Monarchies were successive When the Empire of Almain was made elective it became in short time so either troublesome or base that divers Princes refused to accept it of late it hath been setled in one Family but hath as yet little increased eitheir in dignity or in power The people of Denmark Sweden Hungary and Boeme do chalenge to themselves a right of election but they accept their King by propinquity of bloud So they did in Polonia until the line of Iagello was worn out and then they elected for King Henry Duke of Aniou in France since which time they have always in the change of their Kings exposed their state to open danger of ruine Upon this both general and continual custom Boldus saith that Kingdoms are successive by the Law of Nations affirming further that always it hath been and always it shall be that the first born succeedeth in a Kingdom wherein he is either followed or accompanied with a fair Crie of all the choise
of the King of Tombute did enterprize to attain Soveraignty above them which by violence he effected and left the same to his posterity And because I will not be tedious in running through particulars give you an instance of any one people which hath not divers times received both Prince and Government by absolute constraint Et Phillida solus habito and I will yield to all that you affirm But failing herein you shall be enforced to confess that in many yea in most if not in all Countries the people have received liberty either from the grant or permission of the victorious Prince and not the Prince authority from the vanquished people What helps now do you imagine that the people have assigned to their Prince The first you affirm to be the direction of Laws But it is evident that in the first heroical Ages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 people were not governed by any positive Law but their Kings did both Judge and Command by their word by their will by their absolute power and as Pomponius saith Omnia manu a regibus gubernabantur Kings governed all things without either restraint or direction but onely of the Law of Nature The first Law was promulged by Moses but this was so long before the Laws of other Nations that Iosephus writeth It was more ancient than their Gods Affirming also that the word Law is not found in Homer or in Orpheus or in any Writer of like antiquity· Of this Law of Nature Homer maketh mention in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And they who keep the Laws which God hath prescribed And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vncivil and unjust is he and wanting private state Who holdeth not all civil War in horror and in hate And of the Justice of Kings he writeth in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on In which verses Chrysostom affirmeth by the judgment of Alexander that Homer hath delineated the perfect Image of a King but that he maketh mention of any positive Laws I do rather doubt than assuredly deny For Kings in ancient times did give judgment in person not out of any formality in Law but onely according to natural equity Virgil saith Hoc Priami gestamen erat cum jura vocatis Moredaret populis This was the Robe which Priamus did always use to wear When he the People to him call'd their causes for to hear Which he doth also affirm of Aeneas Dido and of Alcestes This like doth Herodotus report of Midas King of Phrygia who consecrated his Tribunal to Apollo and the like also doth Plutarch of divers Kings of Macedonia Philarchus affirmeth in Athenaeus that the Kings of Persia had Palm-trees and Vines of Gold under which they did sit to hear Causes But because it grew both troublesome and tedious for all the People to receive their Right from one man Laws were invented as Cicero saith and Officers also appointed to execute the same Another Original of Laws was thus occasioned When any People were subdued by Arms Laws were laid like Logs upon their necks to keep them in more sure subjection which both because it is not doubtful and to avoid prolixity I will manifest onely by our own example When the Romans had reduced the best part of this Island into the form of a Province as they permitted liberty of Law to no other Country under their obedience so here also they planted the practice of their Laws and for this purpose they sent over many Professors and among others Papinian the most famous both for Knowledge and Integrity of all the Authors of the Civil Law Again when the Saxons had forced this Realm and parted it into seven Kingdoms they erected so many sets of Law of which onely two were of continuance the Mercian Law and the West-Saxon Law After these the Danes became victorious and by these new Lords new Laws were also imposed which bare the name of Dane-law Out of these three Laws partly moderated partly supplied King Edward the Confessor composed that body of Law which afterwards was called St. Edward's Laws Lastly the Normans brought the Land under their power by whom St. Edward's Laws were abrogated and not onely new Laws but new Language brought into use insomuch as all Pleas were formed in French and in the same Tongue Children were taught the principles of Grammar These causes we find of the beginning of Laws but that they were assigned by the people for assistance and direction to their Kings you bring neither Argument nor Authority for proof it is a part of the dross of your own device The second help which you affirm that Commonwealths have assigned to their Kings is by Parliaments and Privy-Councils But Parliaments in all places have been erected by Kings as the Parliament of Paris and of Mâ—ntpellier in France by Philip the Fair the Parliament in England by Henry the First who in the sixteenth year of his Reign called a Councel of all the States of his Realm at Salisbury which our Historiographers do take for the first Parliament in England affirming that the Kings before that time did never call the common People to Councel After this the Privy-Council at the instance of the Archbishop of Canterbury was also established and since that time the Counsellors of State have always been placed by election of the Prince And that it was so likewise in ancient times it appeareth by that which Homer writeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 First he established a Council of honorable old men And likewise by Virgil gaudet regno Trojanus Acestes Indicitque forum patribus dat jura vocatis Acestes of the Trojan Bloud in Kingdom doth delight He sets a Court and Councel calls and gives each man his Right I will pass over your coarse foggy drowsie Conceit that there are few or none simple Monarchies in the world for it would tire a Dog to toyl after your impertinent errours and will now rip up your Packet of Examples whereby you endeavour to shew that the Power of Kings hath been bridled by their Subjects But what do you infer hereby what can you inforce will you rake over all Histories for examples of Rebellion and then argue a facto ad jus that every thing is lawful which you find to have been done Iustinian saith Non exemplis sed legibus judicandum We must judge Facts by Law and not Law by Facts or by Examples which Alciate and Deeiane do term a Golden Law because there is no Action either so impious or absurd which may not be paralleled by Examples Will you prove it lawful to use carnal familiarity with the Sister with the mother-in-Mother-in-law with the natural Mother You have the example of Cambyses for the first Caracalla for the second Dionysius and Nero for the third The Iews upon whom God had setled his
to the Empire of the Romans So the Tartarians commit absolute power both over their lives and their livings to every one of their Emperors and so have our People many times committed to their King the Authority of the Parliament either generally or else for some particular case For it is held as a rule that any man may relinquish the Authority which he hath to his own benefit and favor Neither is he again at pleasure to be admitted to that which once he did think â—it to renounce And as a private man may altogether abandon his free estate and subject himself to servile condition so may a multitude pass away both their Authority and their liberty by publick consent The second is by prescription and custom which is of strength in all parts of the world least matters should always float in uncertainty and controversies remain immortal And that this Authority of the People may be excluded by prescription it is evident by this one reason which may be as one in a third place of Arithmetick in standing for a hundred Every thing may be prescribed wherein prescription is not prohibited But there is no Law which prohibiteth prescription in this case and therefore it followeth that it is permitted And generally custom doth not only interpret Law but correcteth it and supplyeth where there is no Law in so much as the common Law of England as well in publick as private controversies is no other a few maxims excepted but the common custom of the Realm Baldus saith that custom doth lead succession in principalities which Martinus adviseth to â—ix in memory because of the often change of Princes and the particular custom of every Nation is at this day the most usual and assured Law between the Prince and the Peâ—ple And this do the Emperors Honor us and Arcadius in these words command punctually to be observed Mos namque retinendus est fidelissimae vetustatis the custom of faithful Antiquity must be retained Which place is to this sense ballanced by Pau. Caestrensis Franc. Aretinus and Phil. Corneus who termeth it a moral text The like whereto is found also in the Canon law and noted by the Glossographer Archidiaconus Romanus and Cepola Neither were the Fathers of the Nicene Councel of other Opinion who thus decreed Let antient customs stand in strength Whereto also agreeth that old Verse of Ennius Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque Customs and men of oldest sort The Roman State do best support Which is cited by Saint Austin and esteemed by Cicero both for brevity and truth as an Oracle To the same sense Periander of Corinth said that old Laws and new Meats were fittest for use which saying Phavorinus in Gellius did in this manner a little vary Live after the passed manner speak after the present Hereto also pertaineth that edict of the censors mentioned by Suetonâ—us and Aul. Gellius Those things which are beside the custom and fashion of our Elders are neither pleasing nor to be adjudged right Of this point I shall have occasion more particularly hereafter to write The third means whereby the People may loose their Authority is by way of conquest For howsoever Saint Augustine and after him Alciate do disallow ambition of enlarging Empire and term Wars upon this cause great Theeveries Whereupon Lucane and his Uncle Seneca called Alexander the Great a great robber of the World yet there is no doubt but the sentence of victory especially if the War was undertaken upon good cause as the Conqueror being made his own Arbitrator will hardly acknowledge the contrary is a just title of acquisition reducing the vanquished their priviledges liberties and whole Estate under the discretion of him that is victorious Caesar saith He giveth all that denieth right Which sentence is approved by Covaruvias affirming that the victor maketh all which his sword toucheth to be his own So saith Baldus that he doth his pleasure upon the vanquished and again Caesar in the speech of Ariovistus it is the Law of Arms that the victorious should command those whom they have subdued even as they please Clemens Alexandrinus saith that the goods of Enemies are taken away by right of war Isocrates hath written that the Lacedaemonians did by title of victory in this sort maintain their right We hold this Land given by the Posterity of Hercules confirmed by the Oracle of Delphos the inhabitants thereof being overcome by War Which was not much unlike that which Iephte captain of Israel expostulated with the Ammonites Are not those things thine which Chamos thy God hath possessed but whatsoever the Lord our God hath conquered pertaineth unto us Yea God doth expresly give to the People of Israel the Cities which they should subdue some into full possession others into servitude and subjection By wâ—ich title Iacob also had given to Ioseph his partâ—ge among his brethren even the Laâ—d which he had taken from the Amorites with his sword and with his bow It was usual to the Romans and as Appian saith just to retain principal or direct Dominion in all things which they brought under the sway of their sword Brissonius hath collected certain examples of the form of yielding unto the Romans whereby all prophane and sacred all human and divine matters were submitted unto them Seeing therefore that the people may so many ways loose both their power and their right in affairs of state is not your ignorance adventurous so generally to affirm that if no one form of Government be natural there is no doubt but the people have power both to alter and limit the same as they please Can no Law no custom no Conquest restrain them Your pen doth range and your judgment rage beyond all compass and course of reaâ—on You should have said that there is no doubt but if by all or any of these means the right both of succession and governmâ—â—t be setled in one family according to prâ—â—â—â—quity and priority of blood the people may neither take away nor varie the same and if they do they commit iniustice they violate the law of nations whereby they expose themselvs not only to the infamie and hate of all men but to the revenge of those who will attempt upon them For it is not only lawful but honorable for any people either to right or reveng the breach of this Law against them which contemn it as monsters against them who know it not as beasts Saint Augustine saith If a City upon earth should decree some great mischiefs to be done by the decree of mankind it is to be destroyed And as in the state of one countrey any man may accuse upon a publick crime so in the state of the world any people may prosecute a common offence for as there is a civil band among all the People of one Nation so is there a natural Knot among all men in the
Choise did at times beside many other Enormities erect Malestews Of the two Nations whose Examples you use the Romans and the Lacedemonians the first did the like under divers Empâ—rours as Lampridius writeth and in more ancient times allowed also Parricide of Children the other would sort themselves by fifteen and twenty Families together and hold both Wives and Goods in common I omit the unnatural customs of divers other Nations and will now declare how in straining a few Examples to countenance your Conceit you are constrained to bear your self no less cunning in concealing truths than bold in avouching things which are not onely uncertain but plainly false It is true which you write that the Kings of Sparta by the institution of Lyâ—urgus were obâ—dient to the Officers called Ephori but these were Titular Kings having no other power but a single voice among the Senators and because all Affairs were carried by consent of the People the Estate was then esteemed popular Afterwards Theopompus by pretence of an Oracle drew this Authority from the People to a Senate of thirty whereby the Government did change into an Aristocracy and yet the naked name of Kings was retained By this shuffling-off Rule the Lacedemonians were continually tossed with Tempests of Sedition ceasing not to wade in their own Bloud as before you have acknowledged until in the end they were brought into subjection first by the Macedonians afterward by the Achaeans and lastly by the Romanâ— I will not say now what reason have we but what a shame is it for us to open our ears to these Utopical State-writers who being mellowed in Idleness and having neither Knowledge nor Interest in matters of Government make new Models upon disproportioned joynts borrowed from Nations most different in Rule You affirm by the testimony of Livy that for offence taken against Romulus because he raigned at Pleasure and not by Law the Senators did cut him in pieces in which short Assertion many base untruths are included beneath the degree of any vile word Livy writeth that he sorted the People into order and governed them by Laws and that he was also both advised and valiant in the Field even such a one as Homer describeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both a good King and courageous Commander Concerning his end Livy writeth that in taking muster of his Army a thick Tempest did arise after which he was never seen wherein he is seconded by Solinus Eutropius and the rest onely Livy addeth that there was a rumor but very obscure without any certain either Author or ground I will adde also without probability that he was torn in pieces for how probable is it that such a Fact in the open view of his Army could be very obscure How probable is it also that the People would first tear him in pieces for his Injustice and then worship him for a God Further with what either confidence or conceit do you alledge this Report of Livy for his opinion I find your fetch you apprehend every thing which may if not confirm yet countenance that Doctrine which lately you have drawn out of Cerberus Den That it is lawful to contrive the death of Kings That the People were grieved against Servius Tullius for reigning without Election it is a meer Fantasie a Dream a Device Livy saith that he was declared King with such a Consent as no man had been before him That Tarquinius neglected the Laws of Government prescribed to him by the Common-wealth it is an ugly untruth Livy saith that he brake the ancient manner of Kings before him But for Laws Pomponius affirmeth that at that time the Romans had no Laws but from their Kings and that Sextus Papirius reduced them into one Volume which was called the Civil Law of Papirius and that when the People expelled their Kings they abrogated their Laws also and remained twenty years without any Law Lastly you adde that the Romans did expel their Kings and erect Consuls in their stead but you suppress that which followed which I hold for a common consequence of the like disorder First that for this cause they were presently almost overwhelmed with Wars Secondly that in this state they never enjoyed long time free from Sedition Lastly that as Tacitus saith there was no means to appease these Tumults but by returning to a Monarchy again All this I write rather to manifest the manner of your dealing than that I hold it much regardable what Romans did Your Examples of our present Age I will wrap up in these few words All Nations very few excepted do consent in this form of Government first to be under one Prince secondly to accept him by succession according to propinquity of Bloud In other circumstances either for inaugurating their Prince or for the manner of managing and executing his Government not two Nations in the world in all points do agree And yet is not this diversity raised by any Laws which the People do prescribe unto their Prince as you do most grosly yea peevishly yea maliciously affirm but by the particular Laws and Customs of every Nation in which the consent of the Prince either secret or express sometimes onely is sufficient always principally doth concur Upon this diversity of Customs you conclude that it sufficeth not to alleadge bare propinquity of Bloud What not where that Custom is established as I have declared it to be in most Nations of the World Doth difference of Customs make all Custom void Doth diversity of Custom in some circumstances take away the principal Custom of Succession by Bloud This cleaveth together no surer than Sand you lose both labour and credit in obtruding unto us these weak and loose Arguments without either force of Reason or form of Art Your instance of the Law Salick in France doth offer occasion to enter into a large Field wherein I could plainly prove that there was never any such Law made to bind the descent of the Crown of France and that it hath been the custom in most parts of the world not to exclude Women from succession in State insomuch as Beda and before him Eusebius and Pliny do write that certain People were governed onely by Princes of that Sex But because this is a matter both of long discourse and not proper to our purpose I will contain my self within this Observation That the Exclusion of King Edward the Third from the Crown of France upon this pretence was the cause of the effusion of their bravest Bloud and of the spoil waste and conquest of all that Realm I acknowledge that the English have lost the possession of that Conquest and that was by means of domestical Wars for excluding the nearest in Bloud from the Crown into which unquiet Quarrel you do now endeavour again to embark us Yet no man can assure that the miseries of France for this cause are at an end Rams recoil to strike harder
the other Let us compare then your boisterous Doctrine with that of the Apostles and ancient Fathers of the Church and we shall find that the one is like the rough Spirit which hurled the herd of Swine headlong into the Sea the other like the still and soft Spirit which talked with Elias Neither was the Devil ever able until in late declining times to possess the hearts of Christians with these cursed Opinions which do evermore beget a world of Murders Rapes Ruines and Desolations For tell me what if the Prince whom you perswade the People they have power to depose be able to make and maintain his Party as King Iohn and King Henry the Third did against their Barons What if other Princes whom it doth concern as well in honour to see the Law of Nations observed as also in policy to break those proceedings which may form Presidents against themselves do adjoyn to the side What if whilst the Prince and the People are as was the Frog and the Mouse in the heat of their Encounter some other Potentate play the Kite with them both as the Turk did with the Hungarians Is it not then a fine piece of policy which you do plot or is it not a gross errour to raise these dangers and to leave the defence to possibilities doubtful Go to Sirs go to there is no Christian Country which hath not by your devices been wrapped in Wars You have set the Empire on float with Bloud your Fires in France are not yet extinguished in Polonia and all those large Countries extending from the North to the East you have caused of late more Battels to be fought than had been in five hundred years before Your practices have heretofore prevailed against us of late years you have busied your selves in no one thing more than how to set other Christian Princes on our necks stirring up such store of Enemies against us as like the Grashoppers of Egypt might fill our houses and cover our whole land and make more doubt of room than of resistance Our own people also you have provoked to unnatural attempts you have exposed our Country as a Prey to them that will either invade or betray it supposing belike that you play Christ's part well when you may say as Christ did Think not that I came to send peace I came not to send peace but a sword But when by the power and providence of God all these attempts have rather shewn what good hearts you bear towards us than done us any great harm when in all these practices you have missed the mark now you do take another aim Now having no hope by extremity of Arms you endeavour to execute your malice by giving dangerous advice Now you go about to entangle us with Titles which is the greatest misery that can fall upon a State You pretend fair shews of Liberty and of Power Sed timeo Danaos dona ferentes We cannot but suspect the Courtesies of our Enemies The Power which you give us will pull us down the Liberty whereof you speak will fetter us in Bondage When Themistocles came to the Persian Court Artabanus Captain of the Guard knowing that he would use no Ceremony to their King kept him out of presence and said unto him You Grecians esteem us barbarous for honouring our Kings but we Persians esteem it the greatest honour to us that can be The like Answer will we frame unto you You Iesuits account it a bondage to be obedient unto Kings but we Christians account it the greatest means for our continuance both free and safe An Answer to the third Chapter which is intituled Of the great Reverence and respect due to Kings and yet how divers of them have been lawfully chastised by their Common-wealths for their misgovernment and of the good and prosperous success that God commonly hath given to the same and much more to the putting back of an unworthy Pretender THat Princes may be chastised by their Subjects your proofs are two One is drawn from certain Examples the other from the good success and Successors which usually have followed Surely it cannot be but that you stand in a strong conceit either of the authority of your Word or simplicity of our Judgment otherwise you could not be perswaded by these slender Threads to draw any man to your Opinion Of the force of Examples I have spoken before there is no Villany so vile which wanteth example and yet most of the Examples which you do bring are either false or else impertinent For there have been divers States wherein one hath born the name and title of King without power of Majesty As the Romans in the time of their Consular Estate had always a Priest whom they entitled King whose office consisted in certain Ceremonies and Sacrifices which in former times could not be performed but by their Kings Likewise the Lacedemonians after Lycurgus had formed their Government retained two Kings who had no greater stroke in matters of State than a single Voice as other Senators Such were in Caesars time many petty Kings of Gaul who as Ambiorix King of Leige confessed were subject to their Nobility and questionable by them Such are now the Emperours of Almain because the Puissance and Majesty of the Empire pertaineth to the States who are sworn to the Empire it self and not to the person of the Emperour Such are also the Dukes of Venice the Soveraignty of which State is setled in the Gentlemen In these and such-like Governments the Prince is not Soverain but subject to that part of the Commonwealth which retaineth the Royalty and Majesty of State whether it be the Nobility or Common People and therefore your Examples drawn from them is nothing to our purpose Concerning success it cannot be strange unto you that by the secret yet just Judgement of God divers evil actions are carried with appearance of good success The Prophet David said that his treadings had almost slip't by seeing the wicked to flourish in prosperity The Prophet Ieremiah seemed also to stagger upon this point and it hath always been a dangerous stone in the way of the Godly whereat many have stumbled and some fallen Besides it ordinarily happeneth that good Princes succeed Tyrants partly because they are so indeed as being instructed to a better manage of Government both by the miserable life of their Predecessors and by the ugly infamy which remaineth after their death partly because by means of the Comparison they both seem and are reported to be far better than they are Hereupon Lampridius saith of Alexander Severus I may also say that Alexander was a good Prince by fear for that Heliogabalus his Predecessor was both an evil Prince and also massacred and slain Seeing therefore the reason is so manifest wherefore good Princes should succeed Tyrants is it not rashness is it not impudence is it not impiety for us to wade with unclean feet into God's
in popular Governmens there is nothing but sedition trouble tumults outrages and injustices upon every light occasion and then we shall perceive first that you want the art of a wise deceiver not to be entangled in your tale Secondly that this is mere poyson which the Devil hath dropt out of your Pen to infect Christian Countries with disobedience and disorder In a word to the contrary of this your impudent untruth our Laws do acknowledge supreme authority in the Prince within the Realm and Dominions of England neither can Subjects bear themselves either superiour or equal to their Soveraign or attempt violence either against his person or estate but as well the Civil Law as the particular Laws and Customs of all Countries do adjudge it high and hainous Treason I will speak now without passion What reason have we to accept your idle talk for a kind of authority against the Judgment and Laws of most Nations in the world You proceed that the power of a Prince is given to him by the Commonwealth with such conditions and exceptions as if the same be not kept the people stand free That the Prince receiveth his power under plain conditions you go about to prove afterward now you hold on that in all mutual contracts if one side recede from promise the other remaineth not obliged And this you prove by two Rules of the Law The first is He doth in vain require promise to be kept of another man to whom he refuseth to perform that which he promised The other is A man is not bound to perform his Oath if on the other part that be not performed in respect whereof he did swear Poor fellow had you been as conversant in the light of Law and clear course of Justice as you are in the smoak and dust of some corner of a Colledge you would never have concluded so generally so confidently upon any of the Rules of Law which are subject for the most part unto many exceptions Alexander Felinus do assign five fallencies unto these Rules Socinus giveth the contrary Rule To him that breaketh his faith or oath faith ought to be kept and then restraineth it with seven limitations But all affirm that in those offices which are mutual between any persons by the Law of Nature or of God as between the Father and the Child the Husband and the Wife the Master and Servant the Prince and the Subject although the same be further assured by Promise or by Oath the breach of duty in the one is no discharge unto the other And therefore if the Father performeth not his duty towards his Children they are not thereby acquitted both of the obedience and care which God and Nature exacteth of them howsoever Solon in his Laws discharged Children from nourishing their Parents if they did not train them in some Trade whereby they might acquire their living Much less are Subjects exempted from Obedience if the Prince either erre or be defective in Government because the like respect is not due unto Parents as unto Princes as I have somewhat touched before insomuch as a Son that beareth authority hath right both to command and compel the Father This was declared among the Romans by that which Plutarch Livie Valerius and Gellius do report of Q. Fabius to whom being Consul when Fabius Maximus his Father who had been Consul the year before did approach sitting upon his Horse the Son commanded him by a Sergeant to alight the Father not onely obeyed but highly commended both the Courage and Judgment of his Son in maintaining the Majesty which he did bear and in preferring a publick both Duty and Authority before private Upon those examples Paulus the Lawyer did write that publick discipline was in higher estimation among the Roman Parents than the love of Children After an impertinent discourse that upon divers considerations an Oath ought not to be performed you annex another cause wherefore Subjects may withdraw their Allegeance and that is when it should turn to the notable damage of the Commonwealth And both these you affirm to be touched in the deprivation of Childerick King of France But I regard not what was touched in the deprivation of Childeric I have answered to that in the Chapter next before I require either Arguments or Authority of more tough temper Well then let us turn back the leaf and there we shall find a Rule of the Law because by Rules only you will only beat down Rule In evil promises it is not expedient to keep faith Which is also confirmed by a sentence of Isidâ—rus In evil promises break your word in a dishonest oath change your purpose Well fare your wits good soul Do you account the promise of obedience evil not so I suppose you will say but it turneth to be evil when it turneth to the notable detriment of the Commonwealth It is one of your peculiar gifts the further you go the more impious you declare your self For if you take the word evil in no higher sence than for detriment and dammage it would follow upon your rule that a man were no further tied to his promise than the performance thereof were advantageable unto him You would enforce also that if the Father doth dissipate his patrimonial Estate and run a course to ruine his Family the Children and the Wife may thereupon disavow their duties But if we take a true touch of this point we shall find that the vices of any Prince are not sufficient of themselves to overthrow a State except thereupon Rebellions be raised which will draw all things into confusion For there is no Prince which either hath lived or can almost be imagined to live in so little sence of humanity but generally he both favoureth and maintaineth some order of Justice only against particular persons some of them have violently been carried by the tempest of their passion whereby notwithstanding the inordinate desires of one man cannot possibly reach to the ruine of all So saith Suetonius that under Domitian the provinces were well governed only certain private men at Rome felt the evil of his cruelty and other vices But when the people do break into tumult then all course of Justice is stopped then is either assistance made or resistance weakned for forain Invasion then is every one raised into hope who cannot fly but with other mens Feathers then as when a fierce Horse hath cast his Rider the Reins are loosed to those insolencies which a dissolute people nothing restrained either by honesty or â—â—ar do usually commit For as it is the nature of men when they come ouâ— of one extremity wherein they have been holden by force to run with a swift course into another without staying in the midst so the people breaking out of Tyranny if they be not hold back will run headlong into unbridled liberty and the harder
the same points in effect which before have been mentioned This we must take upon your forfeited Faith for you alleadge no form of Oath onely you write that the fourth National Council of Toledo with all humility convenient did require that the present King and all other that should follow would be meek and moderate towards their Subjects and govern them with Justice and not give sentence in Causes capital without assistance declaring further that if any of them should exercise cruel and proud Authority that they were condemned by Christ with the sentence of Excommunication and separated to everlasting Judgment But what pang hath possessed your dreaming brains to term this by a marginal Note Conditions of reigning in Spain being no other than a reverent and grave admonition of the duty of a King with a fearful declaration of the Judgment of God against wicked Princes And that which was afterward decreed in the sixth Council of Toledo That the King should swear not to suffer any man to break the Catholick Faith because it is a principal point of his duty his Estate was not thereby made conditional The rest of this passage you fill up with froath of the antiquated Law of Don Pelayo prescribing a form of inaugurating the Kings of Spain whereof there is not one point either now in use or pertaining to the purpose So miserable is your case that you can write nothing therein but that which is either impertinent or untrue For France your first Example is taken from the Coronation of Philip the First wherein you note that King Henry his Father requested the people to swear Obedience to his son inferring thereby that a Coronation requireth a new Consent which includeth a certain Election of the Subjects But this is so light that the least breath is sufficient to disperse it Philip was crowned King during the life of his Father which action as it was not ordinary so was it of such both difficulty and weight that it could not be effected without assembly and consent of the States The Oath which he made is in this form extant in the Library of Rheimes I do promise before God and his Saints that I will conserve to every one committed unto me Canonical Priviledge and due Law and Iustice and will defend them by the help of God so much as shall lie in my power as a King by right ought to do within his Realm to every Bishop and to the Church committed to him and further to the People committed to my charge I will grant by my authority the dispensation of Laws according to right Adde to this a more ancient form of the Oath of those Kings which it seemeth you have not seen I swear in the Name of God Almighty and promise to govern well and duly the Subjects committed to my charge and to do with all my Power Iudgement Iustice and Mercy Adde also the Oath which you alleadge of Philip the Second surnamed Augustus To maintain all Canonical Priviledges Law and Iustice due to every man to the uttermost of his power to defend his Subjects as a good King is bound to do to procure that they be kept in the union of the Church to defend them from all Excess Rapine Extortion and Iniquity to take order that Iustice be kept with equity and mercy and to endeavour to expel Hereticks What doth all this rise unto but a Princely promise to discharge honourably and truly those points of duty which the Laws of God did lay upon them What other Conditions or Restraints are imposed What other Contract is hereby made Where are the Protestations which in the end of the last Chapter you promised to shew that if the Prince do fail in his Promise the Subjects are free from their Allegiance What Clause do you find sounding to that sence But you little regard any thing that you say you easily remember to forget your word Well then we must put these your vain Speeches into the reckoning of Money accounted but not received and seeing you cannot shew us that the Kings of France and of Spain are tyed to any Condition whereto the Law of God doth not bind them I will not vary from the judgment of Ordradus in affirming them to be absolute Kings I have pressed this point the rather in this place because you write that most neighbour-Neighbour-Nations have taken the form of anointing and crowning their Kings from the ancient custom of France although the substance be deduced from the first Kings of the Hebrews as appeareth by the anointing of King Saul whereof David you say made great account notwithstanding that Saul had been rejected by God and that himself had lawfully born Arms against him Out Atheist you would be dawbed with Dung and have the most vile filth of your Stews cast in your face Did David bear Arms against his anointed King did he ever lift up his eye-lids against him did he ever so much as defend himself otherwise than by flight It is certain that Shemei did not half so cruelly either curse or revile this holy man who did so much both by speech and action detest this fact that he would rather have endured ten thousand deaths than to have defiled his Soul with so damnable a thought What then shall we say unto you who to set up Sedition and Tumult abuse all divine and humane Writings in whatsoever you believe will advance your purpose who spend some speech of respect unto Kings for allurement onely to draw us more deep into your deceit Shall we give any further ear to your Doctrine both blasphemous and bloudy We will hear you to the end and I deceive my self but your own tale shall in any moderate judgment condemn the authority of your opinions for ever Let us come then to your last Example which is neither the last nor the least whereat you level and that is of England which of all other Kingdoms you say hath most particularly taken this Ceremony of Sacring and Anointing from France Well let the Ceremony be taken from whence you please if the Oath be no other than you do specifie To observe peace honour and Reverence unto Almighty God to his Church and to the Ministers of the same to administer Law and Iustice equalâ—y to all to abrogate evil Laws and Customs and maintain good which was the Oath of King Richard the First the like whereto was that of King Iohn altered onely in the first branch To love and defend the Catholick Church If the Oath be no other I say I do not see what other Answer you need to expect but that it is onely a free Royal Promise to discharge that duty which God doth impose And this is plainly declared by the Speech which you alleadge of Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury to King Henry the Fourth Remember saith he the Oath which voluntarily you made Voluntarily he said and not necessarily it was voluntaly in Oath but necessary in