upon Cases brought before them to determine whether an Act be Binding or no For Acts of Parliament against Common Right Repugnant or Impossible are Voyd Coke 8. fol. 118. Dr. and Student L. 1. C. 6. and to expound the Meaning and Signification of the Words of such Act. Mr. Walker was a man of Law and Abilityes and far from a stickler either for Prerogative or Popery Nay even a Borderer upon Coordination it self But yet he brings himself off with a Distinction from the poynt which our Authour swallows Whole It is most certain says the Other Pag. 116. that when the Three Estates in Parliament have pass'd any Act Their Power Determins as to that Act and then the Authority of the Iudges Begins And whereas the Character Pag. 25. calls King Lords and Commons the Higher Powers of England without any more adoe Mr. Walker qualifyes it Pag. 117. Though this Kingdom says he has always been Ruled by King Lords and Commons yet by the King Architectonicè and the other Two Organicè the King as the Architect the Lords and Commons as his Instruments Each in his proper Sphere of Activity without interfering And till This again come in use look for no Peace This was the Principle of 41. and 42. brought off as well as the matter would bear From hence he proceeds upon the agitation of the Question of Disinheriting which as I have said before is nothing at all to my business nor of any moment in the least to the deciding of this Controversy till all other Rubs and Difficulties that lye in the way to 't shall be first clear'd and especially that undenyable Impediment of the Kings Refusal which must be allow'd on all hands whether the thing may be Lawfully done or not to be an Obstacle not to be Disputed or Oppos'd The Character-maker Pag. 26. finding himself pinch'd upon the Doctrine of Passive Obedience according to the Practice and Precept of the Primitive Times and the very Text of Holy Writ it self brings himself at last to this Notable Resolution of parting with his Religion rather then his Argument The Correspondence says he P. 26. between Ours and the Primitive Christians Case is here so incoherently ballanced by L' Estrange that never were Arguments more Fantastical The Primitive Christians preacht Obedience to Nero Yes and they had forfeited their Christianity if they had done otherwise But what was that Nero An Absolute Monarch And what those Primitive Bishops Not such as Ours they were not a part of the Legislative Power of the Nation as Our Prelates are If Nero invented Racks Tortures and Gibbets for Persecuting or murthering the poor Christians he did it by his own uncontrolable Authority nor were those Primitive Bishops call'd to make Laws and therefore had not the Lawfull power of the least Vote in moderating of Nero's Cruelty or in redresse of the Christians Torments The Author begins now to speak English First he slips in the difference of the Case betwixt an Absolute and a Limited Monarch 'T is true the One Acts according to his Pleasure the Other is so far bounded by Rules and Laws that it is a Violation of Honour and Conscience in Ordinary Cases to pass those Limits But what is all this to the Subjects Obedience For 't is as much Rebellion in Them to take up Arms contrary to Law against a Limited Monarch that plays the Tyrant as against an Absolute Prince that Governs by his Own Will For the Duty of the Subject is the same to the One as to the Other unless there be some clear and explicite Provision or Stipulation in the Government to the Contrary And his Other Shift upon the Difference betwixt Their Bishops and Ours looks as if Mr. Deputy had written that out of his own Mother-wit without consulting his Oracle For how should that Diversity of the Case operate upon the poynt of Passive Obedience to make it more or lesse a Duty He has but one way in the world that I can see to support his Argument and that must be by destroying his Cause For if there be no more then this in 't that the Primitive Bishops had no Votes in Parliament which our Prelates have his Meaning is that when they come once to Vote in Parliament they Act no longer in the condition of Subjects which is a further Explanation of himself upon a Coordinate State Only I think he had as good have kept himself under the Blind of a Legislative Power without Translating it into the Power of MAKING LAWS For though the Two Houses may be properly sayd to Make or to Prepare Bills yet the making of Laws is the Sole Priviledge of the Supreme Magistrate If by what he says of the Power or Right rather of moderating Votes he intends only Offices of Mediation or Councell so far 't is well enough but if he stays there 't will never do his business for there must be Resolution also and Action as well as debate and Advice and that 's the thing he does more then intimate he would be at in the remaining part of this Paragraph We are not says he pag. 30 to wait Gods further Pleasure and Providences to come with so entire a Resignation till we neglect a Lawfull Preservation when approaching Ruine Threatens us The Question with the Author's favour is not the neglecting of Lawfull means but whether the Expedient here under Consideration be Lawful or not And the Writer of the Character is so candid as in the next Clause to come within a very little of agreeing with L' Estrange in the Negative However says he that the Authors Opinion may not appear so strangely Enormous nor his Passion so wholly destructive to Government and so opposite to Christianity as his Answer would render it let us make a little Explanation of the Character c. But he does yet in the same Page declare himself that Passive Obedience may be layd aside under the Tyranny of a Popish Succession That is to say It is Lawfull for Protestant Subjects to Resist a Popish Prince in the Actuall Possession of his Authority and Government For so he expounds himself P. 27. upon the word Successor No man says he truly is either Heir or Successor till he Inherits and Succeeds And then he palliates the matter over again pag. 31. whatsoever Passive Obedience says he is due to our Native Prince we have none due to a Forreign Invader and 't is a plain case that the Popes Supremacy entring into England is an Invading and Usurping Regality How the Opinion of a Prince shall discharge Subjects of their Obedience to Laws I cannot imagine Or by what Right one sort of People under the same Government shall pretend to Over-rule another in such a Case Or I would fain know whether upon the same Ground they may not alter the Form of the Government as well as destroy the Lawfull Successor Or in one word is not the Government already overthrown and all the Laws ipso
Difficulties and for securing the Protestant Religion If the Parliament at Oxford says he P. 17. were not damnably mistaken or very Lewdly forgetfull they have declared Nemine Contradicente that neither they nor their Predecessors have ever heard or seen one Sillable or such a Frame of Expedients offer'd them The Gentleman under favour forgets himself if he means that there never were any such Expedients offer'd for this Project of Accommodation was Agitated and Modified even in the late Long Parliament And Expedients have been likewise since Propos'd unto which his Majesty refers himself in his late Declaration in these words But coâ—trary to our OFFERS and Expectation we saw that NO EXPEDIENTS would be ENTERTAIN'D but that of a Total Exclusion c. P. 6. Toward the bottom of the Seventeenth Page the Character makes an Invidious Descant upon the hopes the Papists had of a Toleration but not one Syllable of the Persons that started those hopes nor upon what Interest and Consideration the Design was set affoot Now he knows very little of our Affairs who does not understand that none were so forward and so Importune for the Gaining of the Dukes Assistance toward such an Indulgence as those very People that are now so Clamorous against his Royal Highness for it Not that any such Disposition was wrought by his Interest but they Labour'd it however under that Plausible Pretext that Provided the Dissenters might be eas'd on the one side they would do their best also and Content themselves that the Papists might be eas'd on the other The Nineteenth Page smells of the Romance Second Ajax Vlisses Palladium Troynovant Tullia c. as if the Author were speaking to us by his Deputy And then toward the bottom of the Page Enter the True Author again who P. 21. guides his Deputy's hand while he writes these words The Author of the Character is a Person so far from laying his hand on his heart and owing any Benefit to Royal Pardons or Acts or Oblivion that I must say this Truth for him Ianuary 48. was past before he was born I would he had taken in the other two Figures 16. to have told us what Century he speaks of There was a Gentleman of my acquaintance in the late times that would needs make himself the Author of Killing no Murther and had like to have been hang'd for his pains though he never wrote Syllable on 't But if Mr. Deputy has so great a kindness for his Principal as to take the Character upon him the Millers man that was Truss'd for his Master was told I remember that he could never do his Master better Service The Remainder of his Discourse is almost wholly Forrein to the matter in Question Insisting Principally upon two Points the Danger and the Inconvenience of a Popish Successor wherein I have declar'd my self in my first Character P. 3. that I take All his Suppositions of Difficultyes and Hazzards in the Case for Granted not that I think them so great as he Represents them but yet admitting them so to be that very Concession will not do his Business The second Point is Whether the Parliament of England may by the Laws of England Exclude the next heir of the Blood from the Succession of the Crown upon thiâ— Question I have thus deliver'd my self in my Case Put P. 9. Some are of opinion For it others Against it but the Legality or Illegality of such an Act is a Point that I am not willing to meddle with either one way or other For whether the Thing may Lawfully be done or not there may be Danger yet and Inconvenience in the Putting of the Question And so likewise in my first Character P. 53. As to that way which is matter of Parliamentary Cognizance I reckon it my Duty to Acquiesce in the Legal Issue of their Debates as an Authority to which I have ever paid a Duty and Veneration So that it would be utterly superfluous to spend Time and Words upon an Argument wherein I can for Quietness and for brevity sake allow him his asking and preserve the main of the Cause still untouch'd But for such Passages as fall in by the by and properly within the Compass of my Design I shall take such notice of them as I find Pertinent to my Purpose In the 24th Page he makes his Gloss upon that Clause in the Oath of Allegeance where we swear to be faithfull to the Kings Lawfull Heirs and Sucessors There 's nothing in that Oath says he that binds them to the Person but to the Thing to no Particular man any further then he is Heir and Successor Lawfully so and no man truly is either Heir or Successor till he Inherits and Succeeds Now if this Clause binds us not to the Person but to the Thing We swear Fidelity Previously to the Right which takes place before the Succession In the Lowest Line of this Page he Lodges the Absolute Power of the Law in the Three Estates in Parliament And P. 25. Expounds this Position under the notion of the Higher Powers of England King Lords and Commons which is a Flat denial of the Kings Sovereign Power And since he is pleas'd to set up a new form of Government He should do well to furnish us with a New Oath of Supremacy too That instead of Declaring the Kings Highness to be the only Supreme Governour of this Realm We may Swear Faith and True Allegeance to King Lords and Commons and to their Highnesses Lawfull Heirs and Successors This Coordinate Imagination was the Main Pillar of the Late Rebellion See what Work he makes now upon these following words in my First Character P. 60. With Reverence to the Utility and Constitution of good and wholsome Laws it is not presently to Cite a Statute or say there 's a Frecedent for those Laws that are Repugnant to the Light of Nature and Common Right are Nullities in themselves Now says he Here 's one of the boldest Master-strokes of the Pen that ever came in Print This Point once gain'd All the Protestant Laws since the Reformation and the whole Fabrick of the Present Government are Totally Subverted 'T is but a Popish Successor believing and maintaining that all the Protestant Laws ever since Harry the Eight's Perversion are against the Light of Nature and Consequently Nullityes in themselves His Logique I perceive is all of a piece If one Popish Prince be a Tyrant or a Faith-breaker All MVST be so If one Statute BE found against Common Right therefore All MAY BE so And then what fear I say of a Popish Successors Damning All Protestant Laws when 't is a Known Rule that the Judges are the only interpreters of the Law But These Possible Nullityes will find better Quarter perhaps from Walker then from L' Estrange and therefore I shall refer Mr. Deputy to the History of Independency Pag. 116. 117. Printed at London 1648. The Authority of the Iudges is Iudicative whose Office is
facto dissolv'd in this very Position Those Laws that have made us the Envy of the Christian world and the Glory and Bulwark of the Reformation And again if the People may be Judges in This Case they may upon the same pretense be Judges in any Other and as well exterminate a Prince for any other Reason as for his Religion 'T is but for Mr. Deputy to tell the People that the King himself is not fit to Govern and what has his Majesty to expect but to march after his Brother Grant but this Point that the Multitude who are in effect Hands without Heads shall over-rule the Laws where are we then but in a state of Horrour and Confusion and Effectually in the Possession of One Hell upon Earth as the Earnest of Another without any Religion at all and every ones Knife at the throat of his Brother But am I a Subject to the Kings Religion or his Title Or where shall I find the Rules and Bounds of my Civil Duty In the Law Or in the Character The Law makes my Allegeance Absolute the Character makes it Conditional The Law binds me to be True to his Majesty his Lawfull Heirs and Successors without any regard to This or That Religion the Character discharges me in case any of them should happen to be Papists Magno Iudice se quisque tuetur King Lords and Commons are of One Opinion and Mr. Deputy of Another The Law obliges me upon pain of Life and Estate and the Gospel upon pain of Damnation But then comes the Author of the Character with the Serpents Dispensation in his Mouth and supersedes all Hath God sayd ye shall not eat of every Tree of the Garden And the Woman said unto the Serpent We may eat of the Fruit of the Trees of the Garden but of the Tree which is in the midst of the Garden God hath said ye shall not eat of it neither shall ye Touch it least ye Dy. And the Serpent sayd unto the Woman ye shall not surely Dy for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof Then Your Eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as Gods knowing Good and Evill Gen. 3. There 's no great Disproportion either in the Appetite or Temptation There 's the Voice of God in both cases on the One hand and the Voice of the Serpent on the Other I cannot find he says by this Text By Me Kings reign c. But that By Me Subjects possess their Lawfull Inheritance might Claim the same Right P. 32. The Question is not the Kings Dispossessing Subjects of their Lawfull Inheritance but the Subjects Disspossessing a Prince of his Lawfull Birthright And by his Argument Popish Subjects may be Dispossess'd as well as a Popish Successor and Phanatical Subjects too as well as Popish If a point of Occasional or Preventional Prudence shall over-rule a Positive Law And according to his Descant By me Kings are DEPOSED that a House of Commons may Reign is as good Divinity as By me King REIGN though the One is a matter of Divine Institution for the Comfort of mankind in General and the other only a Divine permission for the Punishment of some Particular Princes or People And see now how Extravagant an Instance he has brought in for his support Nor can I perceive says he Ibid. that there lyes so much Stresse in Gods giving the Government of the Earth Man and Beast unto whom it seemed meet unto him as to Nebuchadnezzer in the Text but that a MENE MENE TEKEL VPHARZIN written by the Almighties own hand against his Impious Heir the Sacrilegious Idolatrous Belshazzar was as much the word of God and had as much Divine Institution in it as By me Kings reign His Application here is not only Rude and Impertinent to the Highest Degree but the Argument flyes directly in the face of him unless he can shew such another Hand-writing upon the Wall against his R. Highness as is here produc'd against Balshazzar Beside that the Intervening of an Almighty Power in the Case does as good as tell us that the Disinheriting of Princes is a priviledge Reserved by God Peculiarly to Himself He proceeds P 33. to Invalidate as he pretends the Chief Argument of all my Discourse and the Fundamental Design of my whole Pamphlet viz. The Un-alterable Right of Succession And advances Confounding Extraordinary with Common Cases Now so far am I from laying the Stress of my Discourse upon that Text that I have Industriously Declin'd the Question as the last Article to be handled in this Controversy And then he spoils the Cause with the very eagerness of defending it by drawing Conclusions from God's Unaccountable Actings upon Immediate Revelation or Direction to the Practices of men that are under certain Common and Indispensable Rules and Methods of Obedience and Government So Timely a Care says he p. 34. did the Great Founder of Empires the Divine Omnipotence take to shew that the Dispensations of Majesty for his Peoples good and his own Glory were to be preferr'd before the Soveraignty of Birth that Blinder Gift of Chance This does only prove that God Reserves to himself a Freedom of Dispensing with his own Laws but not the least shaddow of any such Power Delegated to the People to Dispense with Gods Laws and let any man Consider whether is the more Competent Provision for the Glory of God and the Good of his People that men should be Ty'd up though with some Inconvenience under God's Appointment to the Orders of Government where the Publick Peace is preserv'd and the Harmony of Humane Society maintain'd or to leave the Multitude the Judges of those matters which only belong to the Supreme Magistrate and at liberty to change Governments and Governours as often as they please which must Inevitably run into Consequences of Bloud and Confusion And if this be not the thing he would be at what 's the meaning of his recommending the Precedent of the Late King of Portugal to the English as a Practicable Example Have we not had says he Ibid. a Late King of Portugal Depofed as Delirious and Frantick and Consequently renderd by Law Vncapable of Reigning and All this done by HIS OWN SUBJECTS and those of HIS OWN Religion without the least Reflection of Treason or Rebellion or the Aspersion of lifting a hand against the Lords Anointed As who should say what a stir is here made about the Duke of York As if it were such a matter to Exclude a Popish Successor I 'le shew ye a way to get quit of the King himself though a Protestant and in the Legal Exercise of his Authority But then you 'l say there must be Delirium or Frenzy in the case Just so much as was found in the Late King will be enough to do the Business Do but possess the People once that the King is a Papist and that single Charge of Popery Includes all Inabilityes For says our Author Ibid. There must go
Dangers to Dangers Here is a Present Opposed to a Future A Greater to a Less and a Protestant King to a Papist The Present Danger is the Probable Effect of these Intoxicating Methods to the People If Fancy was Poyson to the Multitude under the Late King the same Fancy in a Larger Dose and with less Corrective to it will be at leaft as strong a Poyson to the People under this So that we are in Forty times a Greater Danger of a Sedition at Hand then of a Popish Successor at a Distance Now what is there in the Future to weigh against the Life of the King the Safety of the Church the Law Government and the Peace of the Kingdom There may Possibly be a Popish King and there may Probably not And then P. 3. I must Distinguish betwixt the Unhappy Circumstance of being under the Allegeance of a Prince of that Persuasion who is Actually in Possession and Exercise of his Power and the Remote Possibility only of that Danger And a Possibility too of such a Condition that a Thousand things may Intervene to Prevent it As the Contingences of Issue Survivorship c. As to the Ballance of a Greater Danger and a Less P. 52. We 'le e'en take the matter as they suppose A King upon the Throne that 's Principled for Arbitrary Government and Popery but so Clogg'd and shackled with Popular and Protestant Laws that if he had never so great a mind to 't there is not a Subject in his Dominions that would dare to serve him in his Design But on the other hand there 's no King at all No Church No Law No Government No Magna Charta no Petition of Right no Property no Liberty c. And again P 52. Here 's a Protestant Prince Expos'd for fear of a Popish one Is the Chimera of a Future Danger of more value to us then the Conscience of an Incumbent and Indispensable Duty Shall we take pet at God Almighty's Providence and not go to Heaven at all unless we may go our own way Shall we Levell a Shot at the Duke at a distance if there be no coming at him but through the Heart of our Sovereign Moreover P. 53. The Diverting or Disappointing of the Succession must be either by Prevention or by Exclusion If there be danger from a Popish Successor during his Expectancy within the Kingdom the Danger is Infinitely Greater if he be Driven out of it For First supposing it the Peoples Act which the Character does manifestly allow of rather then fail there must be an Illegal and Popular Violence to accomplish it and there 's the Peace of the Government broken already Beside that the Authors of that Violence can never be secure but by following it with More and Greater And this comes presently to be a natural Transition from a Murmur against a Successor to a Tumult in the State In which case the King has only this Choice before him either to part with every thing for the asking or to stand the shock of a Rebellion Now take it either way Here 's much a Greater Mischief Incurr'd then that we fear'd Beside a Standing Army Taxes and Oathes that follow in Course and a new set of Liberty-Keepers and Major-Generalls to secure the Peace This is the Scene of things at home and if we look abroad we shall undoubtedly see the Successors Interest and Reputation encreasing dayly in regard of his Sufferings his Title and his Religion P. 54. Now in Case of a Popish King who is either kept out or Driven on t from the Exercise of his Right by the Tumultuary Licence of the Rabble whether that King makes any Attempt or no the Nation must be at the Charge at least of a Defensive War and of Impositions to maintain it And this will be the Inconvenience even in the Bare Prospect of the State of the Nation without striking a Blow But from Scotland at least if not from Ireland too they must Expect to be Ply'd with Continual Alarms till the Insupportable Expense of Guarding the Borders and Coasts shall make them as Sick of their New Patriots as ever they were of their Old ones and force them at last to render themselves and their Spoyl to the Irresistible Conjunction of as many Powers as will be then Confederate to their Destruction And then comes in the Popery in Earnest that was dreaded but in Fancy before When this new King shall by the Proper Act and forfeiture of a seduc'd and unforeseeing people be delivered from the Fetters of both Honour and Laws Who brings in Popery then but they that Discharg'd him from those Sacred Bonds by the folly and Contumacy of their own Inconsiderate Undertakings Compare now the Danger of a Popish King bounded by Protestant Laws and Ruling over a Protestant People where he may be as happy as an Imperial Crown and the Affections of his Subjects can make him Compare I say a Popish King under these Gracious and Obliging Circumstances in the Quiet Adminstration of his Government with a Prince that is forc'd to make his way with his Sword for the Recovery of his Own and is not only Prick'd on by the Impulses of Iustice and Vengeance but Animated by the Pope himself and Provoked by Indignation to take the Utmost Advantage of that Foolish Forfeiture the People themselves having Cancell'd the Bonds of Authority and Obedience Let any man Compare these two Cases and then speak his Opinion P. 55. And yet once again If it be reasonable to Believe as we are often told and no Mortal can deny it that our Religion is an Eye-sore to the Church of Rome and that this Island would make a Considerable Addition to our Victorious Neighbours late Conquests what way in the world could be propounded more to the Advantage both of the Crown of France and the Court of Rome then the bringing of matters to the Issue here in question When in the Powerfull and Liberall Assistances to this supposed King for the Regaining of his Own the One and the Other are but doing of their own business This Prince in the mean while being led to the One by Inclination and overborn upon the Other by Necessity Ibid. I shall leave it now to the Reader to Judge how far the Second Character in Reply upon the Papist in Masquerade may be admitted as a Defence of the Former It is the Authors design in both Parts by Amplifying and Rhetoricating upon the Dangers of a Popish Successor to transport the People into the most Desperate Resolutions of Acting Suffering all Extremities rather then submit to that Inconvenience Now as is already said the Danger of a Popish Successor is a point that I have given for Granted before-hand and no part of the matter here in Controversy Nor is the Danger it self simply consider'd of any Concluding Force in this Case for First a Less Danger comparatively must give way to a Greater 2ly Let the Danger be never so