Father and Son Maister and Servant wherfore not between King or rather Tyrant and People And whereas Jehu had special command to slay Jehoram a successive and hereditarie Tyrant it seemes not the less imitable for that for where a thing grounded so much on naturall reason hath the addition of a command from God what does it but establish the lawfulness of such an act Nor is it likely that God who had so many wayes of punishing the house of Ahab would have sent a subject against his Prince if the fact in it selfe as don to a Tyrant had bin of bad example And if David refus'd to lift his hand against the Lords anointed the matter between them was not tyranny but private enmity and David as a private person had bin his own revenger not so much the peoples but when any tyrant at this day can shew to be the Lords anointed the onely mention'd reason why David with held his hand he may then but not till then presume on the same privilege We may pass therfore hence to Christian times And first our Saviour himself how much he favourd tyrants and how much intended they should be found or honourd among Christians declares his minde not obscurely accounting thir absolute autoritie no better then Gentilisme yea though they flourishd it over with the splendid name of Benefactors charging those that would be his Disciples to usurp no such dominion but that they who were to bee of most autoritie among them should esteem themselves Ministers and Servants to the public Matt. 20. 25. The Princes of the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them and Mark 10. 42. They that seem to rule saith he either slighting or accounting them no lawful rulers but yee shall not be so but the greatest among you shall be your servant And although hee himself were the meekest and came on earth to be so yet to a tyrant we hear him not voutsafe an humble word but Tell that Fox Luc. 13. And wherfore did his mother the Virgin Mary give such praise to God in her profetic song that he had now by the comming of Christ Cutt down Dynasta's or proud Monarchs from the throne if the Church when God manifests his power in them to doe so should rather choose all miserie and vassalage to serve them and let them still sit on thir potent seats to bee ador'd for doing mischiefe Surely it is not for nothing that tyrants by a kind of natural instinct both hate and feare none more then the true Church and Saints of God as the most dangerous enemies and subverters of Monarchy though indeed of tyranny hath not this bin the perpetual cry of Courtiers and Court Prelates whereof no likelier cause can be alleg'd but that they well discern'd the mind and principles of most devout and zealous men and indeed the very discipline of Church tending to the dissolution of all tyranny No marvel then if since the faith of Christ receav'd in purer or impurer times to depose a King and put him to death for tyranny hath bin accounted so just and requisit that neighbour Kings have both upheld and tak'n part with subjects in the action And Ludovicus Pius himself an Emperor and sonne of Charles the great being made Judge Du Haillan is my author between Milegast King of the Vulâ—zes and his subjects who had depos'd him gave his verdit for the subjects and for him whom they had chos'n in his room Note here that the right of electing whom they please is by the impartial testimony of an Emperor in the people For said he A just Prince ought to be prefer'd before an unjust and the end of government before the prerogative And Constantinus Leo another Emperor in the Byzantine Laws saith that the end of a King is for the general good which he not performing is but the counterfet of a King And to prove that some of our owne Monarchs have acknowledg'd that thir high office exempted them not from punishment they had the Sword of St. Edward born before them by an Officer who was calld Earle of the palace eev'n at the times of thir highest pomp and solemnitie to mind them saith Matthew Paris the best of our Historians that if they errd the Sword had power to restraine them And what restraint the Sword comes to at length having both edge and point if any Sceptic will needs doubt let him feel It is also affirm'd from diligent search made in our ancient books of Law that the Peers and Barons of England had a legall right to judge the King which was the cause most likely for it could be no slight cause that they were call'd his Peers or equals This however may stand immovable so long as man hath to deale with no better then man that if our Law judge all men to the lowest by thir Peers it should in all equity ascend also and judge the highest And so much I find both in our own and forren Storie that Dukes Earles and Marqueses were at first not hereditary not empty and vain titles but names of trust and office and with the office ceasing as induces me to be of opinion that every worthy man in Parlament for the word Baron imports no more might for the public good be thought a fit Peer and judge of the King without regard had to petty caveats and circumstances the chief impediment in high affaires and ever stood upon most by circumstantial men Whence doubtless our Ancestors who were not ignorant with what rights either Nature or ancient Constitution had endowd them when Oaths both at Coronation and renewd in Parlament would not serve thought it no way illegal to depose and put to death thir tyrannous Kings Insomuch that the Parlament drew up a charge against Richard the second and the Commons requested to have judgement decree'd against him that the realme might not bee endangerd And Peter Martyr a Divine of formost rank on the third of Judges approves thir doings Sir Thomas Smith also a Protestant and a Statesman in his Commonwealth of England putting the question whether it be lawful to rise against a Tyrant answers that the vulgar judge of it according to the event and the learned according to the purpose of them that do it But far before those days Gildas the most ancient of all our Historians speaking of those times wherein the Roman Empire decaying quitted and relinquishd what right they had by Conquest to this Iland and resign'd it all into the peoples hands testifies that the people thus re-invested with thir own original right about the year 446 both elected them Kings whoÌ„ they thought best the first Christian Brittish Kings that ever raign'd heer since the Romans and by the same right when they apprehended cause usually deposd and put them to death This is the most fundamental and ancient tenure that any King of England can produce or pretend to in comparison of which all other titles and pleas are but of yesterday If any
should confine and limit the autority of whom they chose to govern them that so man of whose failing they had proof might no more rule over them but law and reason abstracted as much as might be from personal errors and frailties When this would nor serve but that the Law was either not executed or misapply'd they were constraind from that time the onely remedy left them to put conditions and take Oaths from all Kings and Magistrates at their first instalment to doe impartial justice by Law who upon those termes and no other receav'd Allegeance from the people that is to say bond or Covnant to obey them in execution of those Lawes which they the people had themselves made or assented to And this oft times with express warning that if the King or Magistrate prov'd unfaithfull to his trust the people would be disingag'd They added also Counselors and Parlaments not to be onely at his beck but with him or without him at set times or at all times when any danger threatnâ—d to have care of the public safety Therefore saith Claudius Sesell a French Statesman The Parlament was set as a bridle to the King which I instance rather because that Monarchy is granted by all to be a farre more absolute then ours That this and the rest of what hath hitherto been spok'n is most true might be copiously made appeare throughout all Stories Heathen and Christian eev'n of those Nations where Kings and Emperours have sought meanes to abolish all ancient memory of the peoples right by their encroachments and usurpations But I spare long insertions appealing to the German French Italian Arragonian English and not least the Scottish Histories not forgetting this onely by the way that VVilliam the Norman though a Conqueror and not unsworne at his Coronation was compelld a second time to take oath at S. Albanes ere the people would be brought to yeild obedience It being thus manifest that the power of Kings and Magistrates is nothing else but what is onely derivative transferrd and committed to them in trust from the people to the Common good of them all in whom the power yet remaines fundamentally and cannot be tak'n from them without a violation of thir natural birthright and seeing that from hence Aristotle and the best of Political writers have defin'd a King him who governs to the good and profit of his people and not for his owne ends it follows from necessary causes that the titles of Sovran Lord naturall Lord and the like are either arrogancies or flatteries not admitted by Emperors and Kings of best note and dislikt by the Church both of Jews Isai. 26. 13. and ancient Christians as appears by Tertullian and others Although generally the people of Asia and with them the Jews also especially since the time they chose a King against the advice and counsel of God are noted by wise authors much inclinable to slavery Secondly that to say as is usual the King hath as good right to his crown and dignitie as any man to his inheritance is to make the subject no better then the Kings slave his chattell or his possession that may be bought and sould And doubtless if hereditary title were sufficiently inquir'd the best foundation of it would be found but either in courtesie or convenience But suppose it to be of right hereditarie what can be more just and legal if a subject for certaine crimes be to forfet by Law from himselfe and posterity all his inheritance to the King then that a King for crimes proportionall should forfet all his title and inheritance to the people unless the people must be thought created all for him he not for them and they all in one body inferior to him single which were a kinde of treason against the dignity of mankind to affirm Thirdly it followes that to say Kings are accountable to none but God is the overturning of all Law and goverment For if they may refuse to give account then all covnants made with them at Coronation all Oathes are in vaine and meer mockeries all Lawes which they sweare to keep made to no purpose for if the King feare not God as how many of them doe not we hold then our lives and estates by the tenure of his meer grace and mercy as from a God not a mortall Magistrate a position that none but Court parasites or men besotted would maintain And no Christian Prince not drunk with high mind and prouder then those Pagan Caesars that deifi'd themselves would arrogate so unreasonably above human condition or derogate so basely from a whole Nation of men his brethren as if for him onely subsisting and to serve his glory valuing them in comparison of his owne brute will and pleasure no more then so many beasts or vermine under his feet not to be reasond with but to be injurd among whom there might be found so many thousand men for wisdome vertue nobleness of mind and all other respects but the fortune of his dignity farr above him Yet some would perswade us that this absurd opinion was King Davids because in the 51 Psalm he cries out to God Against thee onely have I sinn'd as if David had imagind that to murder Uriah and adulterate his Wife had bin no sinne against his neighbor when as that law of Moses was to the King expresly Deut. 17. not to think so highly of himself above his Brethren David therefore by those words could mean no other then either that the depth of his guiltiness was known to God onely or to so few as had not the will or power to question him or that the sin against God was greater beyond compare then against Uriah What ever his meaning were any wise man will see that the patheticall words of a Psalme can be no certaine decision to a point that hath abundantly more certaine rules to goe by How much more rationally spake the Heathen King Demophoon in a Tragedy of Euripides then these interpretâ—s would put upon King David I rule not my people by tyranny as if they were Barbarians but am my self liable if I doe unjustly to suffer justly Not unlike was the speech of Traian the worthy Emperor to one whom he made General of his Praetorian Forces Take this drawne sword saith he to use for me if I reigne well if not to use against me Thus Dion relates And not Traian onely but Theodosius the younger a Christian Emperor and one of the best causd it to be enacted as a rule undenyable and fit to be acknowledgd by all Kings and Emperors that a Prince is bound to the Laws that on the autority of Law the autority of a Prince depends to the Laws ought submit Which Edict of his remaines yet unrepeald in the Code of Justinian l. 1. tit. 24. as a sacred constitution to all the succeeding Emperors How then can any King in Europe maintaine and write himselfe accountable to none but God when Emperors in
thir owne imperiall Statutes have writt'n and decreed themselves accountable to Law And indeed where such account is not fear'd he that bids a man reigne over him above Law may bid as well a savage beast It follows lastly that since the King or Magistrate holds his autoritie of the people both originally and naturally for their good in the first place and not his owne then may the people as oft as they shall judge it for the best either choose him or reject him retaine him or depose him though no Tyrant meerly by the libertie and right of free born men to be govern'd as seems to them best This though it cannot but stand with plaine reason shall be made good also by Scripture Deut. 17. 14. VVhen thou art come into the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee and shalt say I will set a King over mee like as all the Nations about mee These words confirme us that the right of choosing yea of changing thir owne goverment is by the grant of God him self in the people And therefore when they desit'd a King though then under another forme of goverment and though thir changing displeasd him yet he that was himself thir King and rejected by them would not be a hindrance to what they inended furder then by perswasion but that they might doe therein as they saw good 1 Sam. 8. onely he reserv'd to himself the nomination of who should reigne over them Neither did that exempt the King as if hee were to God onely accountable though by his especiall command anointed Therefore David first made a Covnant with the Elders of Israel and so was by them anointed King 1 Chron. 11. And Jehoiada the Priest making Jehoash King made a Cov'nant between him and the people 2 Kings 11. 17. Therefore when Roboam at his comming to the Crowne rejected those conditions which the Israelites brought him heare what they answer him what portion have we in David or inheritance in the son of Jesse See to thine own house David And for the like conditions not perform'd all Israel before that time deposd Samuell not for his own default but for the misgovement of his Sons But som will say to both these examples it was evilly don I answer that not the latter because it was expressely allow'd them in the Law to set up a King if they pleas'd and God himself joynd with them in the work though in some sort it was at that time displeasing to him in respect of old Samuell who had governd them uprightly As Livy praises the Romans who took occasion from Tarquinius a wicked Prince to gaine their libertie which to have extorted saith hee from Numa or any of the good Kings before had not bin seasonable Nor was it in the former example don unlawfully for when Roboam had prepar'd a huge Army to reduce the Israelites he was forbidd'n by the Profet 1 Kings 12.24 Thus saith the Lord yee shall not goe up nor fight against your brethren for this thing is from me He calls them thir brethren not Rebels and forbidds to be proceeded against them owning the thing himselfe not by single providence but by approbation and that not onely of the act as in the former example but of the fitt season also he had not otherwise forbidd to molest them And those grave and wise Counsellors whom Rehoboam first advis'd with spake no such thing as our old gray headed Flatterers now are wont stand upon your birth-right scorne to capitulate you hold of God and not of them for they knew no such matter unless conditionally but gave him politic counsel as in a civil transaction Therefore Kingdom and Magistracy whether supreme or subordinat is calld a human ordinance 1 Pet. 2. 13. c. which we are there taught is the will of God wee should submitt to so farr as for the punishment of evill doers and the encouragement of them that doe well Submitt saith he as free men And there is no power but of God saith Paul Rom. 13. as much as to say God put it into mans heart to find out that way at first for common peace and preservation approving the exercise therof els it contradicts Peter who calls the same autority an Ordinance of man It must be also understood of lawfull and just power els we read of great power in the affaires and Kingdomes of the World permitted to the Devill for saith he to Christ Luke 4. 6. all this power will I give thee and the glory of them for it is deliverd to me and to whomsoever I will I give it neither did hee ly or Christ gainsay what hee affirm'd for in the thirteenth of the Revelation wee read how the Dragon gave to the beast his power his seat and great autority which beast so autoriz'd most expound to be the tyrannical powers and Kingdomes of the earth Therfore Saint Paul in the forecited Chapter tells us that such Magistrates hee meanes ' as are not a terror to the good but to the evill such as beare not the sword in vaine but to punish offenders and to encourage the good If such onely be mentiond here as powers to be obeyd and our submission to them onely requird then doubtless those powers that doe the contrary are no powers ordaind of God and by consequence no obligation laid upon us to obey or not to resist them And it may be well observd that both these Apostles whenever they give this precept express it in termes not concret but abstract as Logicians are wont to speake that is they mention the ordinance the power the autoritie before the persons that execute it and what that power is lest we should be deceavd they describe exactly So that if the power be not such or the person execute not such power neither the one nor the other is of God but of the Devill and by consequence to bee resisted From this exposition Chrysostome also on the same place dissents not explaining that these words were not writt'n in behalf of a tyrant And this is verify'd by David himself a King and likeliest to bee Author of the Psalm 94. 20. which saith Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee And it were worth the knowing since Kings and that by Scripture boast the justness of thir title by holding it immediately of God yet cannot show the tâ—me when God ever set on the throne them or thir forefathers but onely when the people chose them why by the same reason since God ascribes as oft to himself the casting down of Princes from the throne it should not be thought as lawful and as much from God when none are seen to do it but the people and that for just causes For if it needs must be a sin in them to depose it may as likely be a sin to have elected And contrary if the peoples act in election be pleaded by a King as the act of God and the most just title to
object that Gildas condemns the Britanes for so doing the answer is as ready that he condemns them no more for so doing then hee did before for choosing such for saith he They anointed them Kings not of God but such as were more bloody then therest Next hee condemns them not at all for deposing or putting them to death but for doing it over hastily without tryal or well examining the cause and for electing others worse in thir room Thus we have here both Domestic and most ancient examples that the people of Britain have deposd and put to death thir Kings in those primitive Christian times And to couple reason with example if the Church in all ages Primitive Romish or Protestant held it ever no less thir duty then the power of thir Keyes though without express warrant of Scripture to bring indifferently both King and Peasant under the utmost rigor of thir Canons and Censures Ecclesiastical eev'n to the smiting him with a final excommunion if he persist impenitent what hinders but that the temporal Law both may and ought though without a special Text or president extend with like indifference the civil Sword to the cutting off without exemption him that capitally offends Seeing that justice and Religion are from the same God and works of justice ofttimes more acceptable Yet because that some lately with the tongues and arguments of Malignant backsliders have writt'n that the proceedings now in Parlament against the King are without president from any Protestant State or Kingdom the examples which follow shall be all Protestant and chiefly Presbyterian In the yeare 1546. The Duke of Saxonie Lantgrave of Hessen and the whole Protestant league raysd open Warr against Charles the fifth thir Emperor sent him a defiance renounc'd all faith and allegeance toward him and debated long in Counsell whether they should give him so much as the title of Caesar Sleidan l. 17. Let all men judge what this wanted of deposing or of killing but the power to doe it In the yeare 1559. the Scotch Protestants claiming promise of thir Queen Regent for libertie of conscience she answering that promises were not to be claim'd of Princes beyond what was commodious for them to grant told her to her face in the Parlament then at Sterling that if it were so they renounc'd thir obedience and soone after betooke them to Armes Buchanan Hist. l. 16. certainely when allegeance is renounc'd that very hour the King or Queen is in effect depos'd In the yeare 1564. John Knâ—x a most famous Divine and the reformer of Scotland to the Presbyterian discipline at a generall Assembly maintaind op'nly in a dispute against Lethington the Secretary of State that Subjects might and ought execute Gods judgements upon thir King that the fact of Jehu and others against thir King having the ground of Gods ordinary command to put such and such offenders to death was not extraordinary but to bee imitated of all that prefer'd the honour of God to the affection of flesh and wicked Princes that Kings if they offend have no privilege to be exempted from the punishments of Law more then any other subject so that if the King be a Murderer Adulterer or Idolater he should suffer not as a King but as an offender and this position hee repeates againe and againe before them Answerable was the opinion of John Craig another learned Divine and that Lawes made by the tyranny of Princes or the negligence of people thir posterity might abrogate and reform all things according to the original institution of Common-wealths And Knox being commanded by the Nobilitie to write to Calvin and other learned men for thir judgements in that question refus'd alleging that both himselfe was fully resolv'd in conscience and had heard thir judgements and had the same opinion under hand-writing of many the most godly and most learned that he knew in Europe that if he should move the question to them againe what should he doe but shew his owne forgetfulness or inconstancy All this is farr more largely in the Ecclesiastic History of Scotland l. 4. with many other passages to this effect all the book over set out with diligence by Scotchmen of best repute among them at the beginning of these troubles as if they labourd to inform us what wee were to doe and what they intended upon the like occasion And to let the world know that the whole Church and Protestant State of Scotland in those purest times of reformation were of the same belief three years after they met in the feild Mary thir lawful and hereditary Queen took her prisoner yeilding before fight kept her in prison and the same yeare deposd her Buchan Hist. l. 18. And four years after that the Scots in justification of thir deposing Queen Mary sent Embassadors to Queen Elizabeth and in a writt'n Declaration alleag'd that they had us'd towards her more lenity then shee deservd that thir Ancestors had heretofore punishd thir Kings by death or banishment that the Scots were a free Nation made King whom they freely chose and with the same freedome un-Kingd him if they saw cause by right of ancient laws and Ceremonies yet remaining and old customers yet among the High-landers in choosing the head of thir Clanns or Families all which with many other arguments bore witness that regal power was nothing else but a mutuall Covnant or stipulation between King and people Buch. Hist. l. 20. These were Scotchmen and Presbyterians but what measure then have they lately offerd to think such liberty less beseeming us then themselves presuming to put him upon us for a Maister whom thir Law scarce allows to be thir own equall If now then we heare them in another straine then heretofore in the purest times of thir Church we may be confident it is the voice of Faction speaking in them not of truth and Reformation In the yeare 1581. the States of Holland in a general Assembly at the Hague abjur'd all obedience and subjection to Philip King of Spaine and in a Declaration justifie thir so doing for that by his tyrannous goverment against faith so oft'n giv'n and brok'n he had lost his right to all the Belgic Provinces that therfore they deposd him and declar'd it lawful to choose another in his stead Thuan. l. 74. From that time to this no State or Kingdom in the World hath equally prosperd But let them remember not to look with an evil and prejudicial eye upon thir neighbours walking by the same rule But what need these examples to Presbyterians I meane to those who now of late would seem so much to abhorr deposing whenas they to all Christendom have giv'n the latest and the liveliest example of doing it themselves I question not the lawfulness of raising Warr against a Tyrant in defence of Religion or civil libertie for no Protestant Church from the first Waldenses of Lyons and Languedoc to this day but have don it round and maintaind it
enthrone him why may not the peoples act of rejection be as well pleaded by the people as the act of God and the most just reason to depose him So that we see the title and just right of reigning or deposing in reference to God is found in Scripture to be all one visible onely in the people and depending meerly upon justice and demerit Thus farr hath bin considerd briefly the power of Kings and Magistrates how it was and is originally the peoples and by them conferrd in trust onely to bee imployd to the common peace and benefit with libertie therfore and right remaining in them to reassume it to themselves if by Kings or Magistrats it be abus'd or to dispose of it by any alteration as they shall judge most conducing to the public good Wee may from hence with more ease and force of argument determin what a Tyrant is and what the people may doe against him A Tyrant whether by wrong or by right comming to the Crowne is he who regarding neither Law nor the common good reigns onely for himself and his faction Thus St. Basil among others defines him And because his power is great his will boundless and exorbitant the fulfilling whereof is for the most part accompanied with innumerable wrongs and oppressions of the people murders massacres rapes adulteries desolation and subversion of Citties and whole provinces look how great a good and happiness a just King is so great a mischeife is a Tyrant as hee the public Father of his Countrie so this the common enemie Against whom what the people lawfully may doe as against a common pest and destroyer of mankinde I suppose no man of cleare judgement need goe surder to be guided then by the very principles of nature in him But because it is the vulgar folly of men to desert thir owne reason and shutting thir eyes to think they see best with other mens I shall shew by such examples as ought to have most waight with us what hath bin don is this case heretofore The Greeks and Romans as thir prime Authors witness held it not onely lawfull but a glorious and Heroic deed rewarded publicly with Statues and Garlands to kill an infamous Tyrant at any time without tryal and but reason that he who trod down all Law should not bee voutsaf'd the benefit of Law Insomuch that Seneca the Tragedian brings in Hercules the grand suppressor of Tyrants thus speaking Victima haud ulla amplior Potest magisque opima mactari Jovi Quam Rex iniquus There can be slaine No sacrifice to God more accetable Then an unjust and wicked King But of these I name no more lest it bee objected they were Heathen and come to produce another sort of men that had the knowledge of true Religion Among the Jews this custome of tyrant-killing was not unusual First Ehud a man whom God had raysd to deliver Israel from Eglon King of Moab who had conquerd and rul'd over them eighteene yeares being sent to him as an Ambassador with a present slew him in his owne house But hee was a forren Prince an enemie and Ehud besides had special warrant from God To the first I answer it imports not whether forren or native For no Prince so native but professes to hold by Law which when he himselfe overturnes breaking all the Covnants and Oaths that gave him title to his dignity and were the bond and alliance between him and his people what differs he from an outlandish King or from an enemie For looke how much right the King of Spaine hath to govern us at all so much right hath the King of England to govern us tyrannically If he though not bound to us by any league comming from Spaine in person to subdue us or to destroy us might lawfully by the people of England either bee slaine in fight or put to death in captivity what hath a native King to plead bound by so many Covnants benefits and honours to the welfare of his people why he through the contempt of all Laws and Parlaments the onely tie of our obedience to him for his owne wills sake and a boasted praerogative unaccountable after sev'n years warring and destroying of his best subjects overcom and yeilded prisoner should think to scape unquestionable as a thing divine in respect of whom so many thousand Christians destroy'd should lye unaccounted for polluting with thir slaughterd carcasses all the Land over and crying for vengeance against the living that should have righted them Who knows not that there is a mutual bond of amity and brotherhood between man and man over all the World neither is it the English Sea that can sever us from that duty and relation a straiter bond yet there is between fellow-subjects neighbours and friends But when any of these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to another so as hostility 〈…〉 doth the Law decree less against them then oepn enemies and invaders or if the Law be not present or too weake what doth it warrant us to less then single defence or civil warr and from that time forward the Law of civill defensive Warr differs nothing from the Law of forren hostility Nor is it distance of place that makes enmitie but enmity that makes distance He therefore that keeps peace with me neer or remote of whatsoever Nation is to mee as farr as all civil and human offices an Englishman and a nighbour but if an Englishman forgetting all Laws human civil and religious offend against life and libertie to him offended and to the Law in his behalf though born in the same womb he is no better then a Turk a Sarasin a Heathen This is Gospel and this was ever Law among equals how much rather then in force against any King whatsoever who in respect of the people is coufessd inferior and not equal to distinguish therfore of a Tyrant by outlandish or domestic is a weak evasion To the second that he was an enemie I answer what Tyrant is not yet Eglon by the Jewes had bin acknowledgd as thir Sovran they had servd him eighteen yeares as long almost as wee our VVilliam the Conqueror in all which time he could not be so unwise a Statesman but to have tak'n of them Oaths of Fealty and Allegeance by which they made themselves his proper subjects as thir homage and present sent by Ehud testifyd To the third that he had special warrant to kill Eglon in that manner it cannot bee granted because not expressd t is plain that he was raysd by God to be a Deliverer and went on just principles such as were then and ever held allowable to deale so by a Tyrant that could no otherwise be dealt with Neither did Samuell though a Profet with his owne hand abstain from Agag a forren enemie no doubt but mark the reason As thy Sword hath made women childless a cause that by the sentence of Law it selfe nullifies all relations And as the Law is between Brother and Brother