they are not so natural so easie safe and convenient Nor are all Monarchies equally absolute for tho' it is Essential to a Monarch to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is free from Coertion and Punishment and Legibus Solutus Grot. de J. Belli l. 2. Cap. 4. Se per modum Legis id est superioris obligare nemo potest hinc est quod Legum Auctores habent jus Leges suas mutandi This freedom from the Coactive power of Laws is common to all forms of Government And belongs to the Person or Persons in whom the Supreme Power is lodged and is of Absolute Necessity because no Government can subsist without it Patriarch pag. 99. Vide Suarez de leg lib. 1. Cap. 8. Sect. 9. lib. 3. Cap. 35. Sect 3. Nullus potest sibi ipsi praecipere inducendo obligationem quia praeceptum postulat dominum Nullus autem potest jurisdictionem in se habere nec sibi ipsi esse subjectus That is free from the Coactive Power of Laws as Sir R. Filmer hath it p. 91. So that what ever he doth his Subjects cannot call him to an account or punish him Tho' I say these things are Essential to all Monarches as such yet it will not presently follow that all Monarches have equal Powers because tho' at first they were all equal yet since some of them have granted to their Subjects greater Priviledges than others have and so tho' the People cannot claim them as Natural Liberties nor resist their Princes with Force and Arms if they be invaded Yet they may petition them to continue to them the Grace and Bounty of their Ancestors And such Princes are bound so to do not out of Fear of punishment from their Subjects but that they may have the Love and Advance the Welfare of their Subjects which is indeed their own That this is agreeable to Sir Robert Filmer appears pag. 93. Sect. 6. Now albeit Kings who make the Laws be as King James doth teach us above the Laws yet will they rule their Subjects by the Law and a King Governing in a Setled Kingdom leaves to be a King and degenerates into a Tyrant so soon as he seems not to Rule according to his Laws yet where he sees the Laws rigorous or doubtful he may mitigate and interpret And a little after altho' a King do frame all his Actions to be according to the Laws yet he is not bound thereto but at his good will and for good example Or so far forth as the General Law of the safety of the Common-weale doth naturally bind him for in such sort only Positive Laws may be said to bind the King not by being Positive but as they are naturally the Best or Only means for the preservation of the Common-Wealth By this means are all Kings even Tyrants and Conquerors bound to preserve the Lands Goods Liberties and Lives of all their Subjects not by any municipal Laws of the Land so much as the Natural Law of a Father which binds them to ratifie the Acts of their Fore-fathers and Predecessors in things necessary for the Publick Good of their Subjects Principem non ligari Legibus scilicet quoad vim Coactivam 1. quia Coactio ex intrinseca raticne sua postulat ut ab extrinseco proveniat Ergo Princeps non potest cogere seipsum per suam Legem Nec etiam cogi potest a subditis quia nullus Inferior potest violentas manus inficere in Superiorem nec etiam potest cogi ab aequali qui non habet in illum Jurisdictionem not denique a Superiore quia agimus de Principe qui Superiorem non habet c. Suarez de Leg. 3. cap. 35. Sect. 15. Paena per se fertur in invitum ideo ferri non potest nisi ab habente Superiorem potestatem in alium tanquam sibi subditum ibid. These are the very words of that Author and much more there is to the same purpose in this piece so that tho' Mr. Sidney says That the Regal Power could be restrained by no Laws i. e. that it must of necessity be Tyrannical according to Filmer's description of it yet this is a great mistake for a Man may be as firmly bound by his Interest by the fear of God by Conscience c. as by the fear of Punishment and these are common to Princes with their Subjects and indeed even amongst Subjects where the fear of Punishment is the only motive the Obedience is weak irregular unsteady and for the most part of no long duration His next Complaint is That according to Sir R. Filmer the Regal Power could not be restrained by any Oaths Now let us see in the next place what Filmer saith for that and we shall find it Patriarcha pag. 95. 7. Others there be that affirm that although Laws of themselves do not bind Kings yet the Oaths of Kings at their Coronations tye them to keep all the Laws of their Kingdoms How far this is true let us but examine the Oath of the Kings of England at their Coronation the Words whereof are these Art thou pleased to cause to be Administred in all thy Judgments indifferent and upright Justice and to use discretion with Mercy and Verity Art thou pleased that our upright Laws and Customs be observed and dost thou promise that those shall be Protected and Maintained by thee These are the Articles of the Kings Oath which concern the Laity or Subjects in general to which the King answers affirmatively being first demanded by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Pleaseth you to confirm and observe the Laws and Customs of Anticot Times granted from God by just and devout Kings unto the English Nation by Oath unto the said People especially the Laws Liberties and Customs granted unto the Clergy and Laity by the Famous King Edward We may observe in these Words of the Articles of the Oath that the King is required to observe not All the Laws but only the Upright and that with Discretion and Mercy The word Upright cannot mean all Laws because in the Oath of Richard the Second I find evil and unjust Laws mentioned which the King swears to abolish So that in effect the King doth Swear to keep no Laws but such as in his Judgment are Upright and those not literally always but according to the Equity of his Conscience joyned with Mercy which is properly the Office of a Chancellor rather than of a Judge and if a King did strictly swear to observe all the Laws he could not without Perjury give his consent to the Repealing or Abrogating of any Statute by Act of Parliament which would be very mischievable to the State But let it be supposed for truth that Kings do swear to observe all the Laws of their Kingdoms yet no man can think it reason that Kings should be more bound by their voluntary Oaths than common Persons are by theirs Now if a private Person make a Contract either with Oath
have the consent of the People which he calls an Act of State he is no Vsurper because he obtains the Crown by the consent of a willing Nation Grot ac 1 Bell. l. 2. c. 4. Sect. 14. Than which there can be nothing more injurious to hereditary Kingdoms where as the true Notion of an Usurper is one that obtains the Possession of a Throne to which he hath no rightful Title whether he come in by the consent of the People or without it by Force Fraud or Faction And the most Dangerous of all Enemies unto Kings were they who raising their Power to an exorbitant height allowed unto Vsurpers all the Rights belonging to it This is oddly penn'd and it is probable when I have proved Sir R. Filmer to be none of them it will be pretended some other Persons were meant though it can scarcely be understood of any other than he and such as found all Government in Paternal Power Sir R. Filmer thus declares his Judgment pag. 23. The Authority that is in any one a Prince or in many an Aristocracy or in all a Democracy is the only Right and Natural Authority of a Supreme Father Which is as much as if he had said Humane Power ought never to rise above the Spring-head The highest that God Ordained in the World amongst Men was Paternal Power And this is no such formidable exorbitant thing as Mr. Sidney would bear the World in hand I cannot better express this than in the words of Seneca Ad Clem. lib. 1. cap. 14. What is the Duty of a Prince That of kind Parents Who use to chide their Children sometimes sweetly and at other with more sharpness and sometimes correct them with blows Did ever any wise man dis-inherit his Son for his first Offence Except many and great injuries Conquer his Patience unless that which he fears for the future he greater than what he Condemns as past he doth not come to a final Sentence He first tries by many ways to Reclaim his unsetled Manners declining to the worse and only proceeds to extremities when he despairs No Parents proceeds to * Supplicia Extirpation till he hath in vain spent all other Remedies That which becomes a Parent becomes a Prince Who is stiled THE FATHER OF HIS COVNTRY without flattery In all our other Titles we consult their Honour We have call'd them the Great the Happy the August and heaped upon Ambitious Majesty all the Titles we could invent giving these to them But we have styled him the Father of his Country that the Prince might consider the Power of a Father was given him Which is the most Temperate of all Powers consulting the Welfare of the Children and preferring their Good before its own It is a long time before a Father can resolve to cut off one of his own limbs and when he hath unwillingly done it could wish it on again and in the Act groans and delays a long time before he doth it For he seems to Condemn willingly who does it quickly to punish unjustly who doth it too severely The People of Rome in our memory almost slew Erixion a Gentleman in the Market-place for having scourged his Son to death for the Authority of Augustus Caesar could hardly deliver him from the inraged Hands of the Roman Fathers and Children This was the Opinion of that great Philosopher and Minister of State in that piece he writ on purpose to perswade Princes to Olemency And for my part I have ever thought Gods love and kindness to Mankind did never appear in any thing more except in mans Redemption than in Creating only one Man and out of him only one Woman * Filiam non filiam Urorem duâ—i Eman. Thesaur de Adamo So that Adam was a kind of Father of his Wife That Marital as well as all other Power might be founded in Paternal Jurisdiction That all Princes might look upon the meanest of their Subjects as their Children And all Subjects upon their Prince as their common Father And upon each other as the Children of one Man that Mankind might not only be vnited in one common Nature but also be of one Blood of one Family and be habituated to the best of Governments from the very Infancy of the World Were this well considered as there could be no Tyrants so neither would there be any * Siquidem est arccius Patriae parentem quam suum eccidere Cicero Philip. 2d Traytors and Rebels but both Prince and People would strive to out do each other in the Offices of Love and Duty And now let any man read Sir R. Filmer's Patriarcha and see if he have ascribed one dram of Power to Princes which will not naturally spring and arise from Supreme Paternal Power Which how much soever Mr. Sidney may dislike it is no Exorbitant height As to the second period or member of this Paragraph the allowing unto Usurpers all the rights belonging unto Princes upon which Mr. Sidney so enlargeth himself in displaying the mischiefs that follow it I have formerly set forth Sir R. Filmer in his own words by which it will appear how little reason he hath given for such a declamation For first he calls it a judgment of God for the correction of the Prince or a Punishment of the People 2ly Tho' in this he acknowledgeth God's justice yet he declared the Act to be sinful and damnable in them that do it Now if this will make a Man a most dangerous Enemy unto Kings how yet can Mr. Sidney pretend to correct him who in this very paper allows the expulsion of Tarquin the insurrection against Nero the Slaughter of Caligula and Domitian to be good Acts of State and will not allow Pipin and Hugh Capet to be Usurpers because they did it by the Consent of Willing Nations So that we may set our hearts at rest for there never was nor ever shall be an Usurper except such as having good Titles do not think it necessary to Cajole the People but presuming upon that enter the Government without the Leave of Mr. Multitude He concludes his reasons against Usurpers Thus. This is the Scope of the whole Treatise viz. That part of which was at the Tryal produced against him the Writer gives such reasons as at present did occur unto him to prove it This seems to agree with the Doctrines of all times Nations and Religions the Best and Wisest of all Kings have ever acknowledged it the Scriptures seem to declare it c. Now it is a little wonderful that he should be so well acquainted with a piece that was Counterfeit and laid in his Study but yet it is much more wonderful that there should even seem tho' but to him to be such an Agreement about the power of the People in setting up such Governments as best pleased them that the People are judge of all differences that happen between them and their Prince that he must be content to
submit his Interest unto theirs since he is no more then any one of them in any other Respect than that he is by the Consent of all raised above any other Tryal p. 23. Now if these and several other be such doctrines as he describes i. e. Approved in all Ages Nations and Religions then will I never trust my Eyes more Let but the Reader consult Sir R. Filmers Patriarcha ' and he will stand amazed at the confidence prejudice or partiality of this man Indeed the Heathen Philosophers and Historians being ignorant of the true History of the Creation do generally seem to think that Regall power which they all own to have been the first form of Government was introduced by the consent of the People and thus Cicero expresseth it de leg lib. 1. cap. 2. All the Ancient Nations obeyed Kings which sort of Dominion Empire they the people gave at first to the most Just and Wisest men But with Christianity this Doctrine expired and all the Fathers and Ancient Christians without exception looked upon God as the Author of Kingly Government and the Giver of Kings I will quote only one St. Augustin De Civit. dei li. 4. cap. 33. God the Author and Giver of Happiness because he only is the true God gives himself earthly Kingdoms both to the Good and to the Bad and this not inconsiderately and as it were by chance because he is God and not Fortune but according to the Order of things and times which is secret as to us but most perfectly known to him And this was the Doctrine of all Christians till Pope Zachary revived the old Heathen Doctrines to justifie the Deposition of Childerick and Election of Pipin in France The King saith he Aven l. 3. Annal. Boiariae is Obnoxious to the People by whose favour he injoys whatsoever he hath that is he received from them his Power Honour Riches Glory and Dignity The Multitude Plebs makes a King and may DEPOSE him Sacro Sancta regum Majestas p. 26. A Learned man of our Country cites this passage and saith that for ought he knew he was the first Divine or Pope of Rome either that said so or writ so So in all probability here is the first Christian Author of Mr. Sidneys Doctrine about the middle of the 7th Centry How and for what ends it was imbraced by the School-men and after them by the Presbyterians you may find in the beginning of the Patriarcha The rest deserves just as much Credit as this doth and might most easily be answered if it were worth the while There is one thing more he quarrelled Sir R. Filmer for at his Tryal p. 33. He saith it is the same thing whether a Prince be of Age or no a Man or a Child of Sense or out of Sense And so doubtless it is as to the right tho' not as to the exercise of that right thus Sir R. expresseth it by this means Succession pag. 20. it comes to pass that many a Child by succeeding a King hath the right of a Father over many a Gray-headed Multitude and hath the Title of Pater Patriae Est tamen to quoque tempore Filius out Filia capax Dominii in res ex jure gentium Sed Exercitium impeditur ob judicii imperfectionem c. Grot. de jur Bell l. 2. c. 5. Sect. 1. n. 2. Of this the Scriptures give several Examples and some of them have proved excellent Princes But then such Princes have ever had Guardians or Protectors But this Gentleman seems to yield the Point when he saith unless be any Prince could deduce his pedigree from the Eldest Son of Noah and shew that the succession had still continued in the Eldest of the Eldest Line and been so deducted to him Why what if a Prince could do this then it seems Mr. Sidney would allow him a right to his Crown without the consent of the people which must be by the right of Primogeniture and Nature Well there is certainly such a man in the World how came the people in every Nation by his right If any Prince should pretend a Right to an Universal Monarchy I think it were but reasonable he should be put to make out his Title according to Mr. Sidney's Rule but seeing no body does so to the best of my knowledge it is but reasonable that all Princes should in the mean time enjoy what they are in lawful possession of till this Heir of Noah hath make out his Pedigree and Title and then they may consider further of it And in the interim Mr. Sidney will certainly be wiped out of Mr. Multitudes Calendar of Saints and Martyrs for thus betraying their Case to the Kings and Princes of the World who will never now willingly surrender their Crowns and Scepters but still pretend when all other Arguments fail they keep them to the use of Noah's Heir general Thus I have with as much brevity as I could answered what ever I have remarked in this Paper or the Tryal that doth particularly relate to Sir R. Filmer and if the Reader will but be pleased to read that piece himself it will abundantly satisfie him that all Mr. Sidney's Clamour against it is causeless and unreasonable the sole Effect of passion interest prejudice and such other humane infirmities For tho' this is a Posthumous piece and for want of the last hand of that Learned Gentleman is not so full and perfect as he might have made it yet there are such threads of Learning Truth Modesty Loyalty and Prudence run through every part of it that the Reader will think his pains abundantly recompensed FINIS