scorn to have Charles compared with so cruel a Tyrant as Nero he resembled him extremely much For Nero likewise often threatned to take away the Senate Besides he bore extreme hard upon the Consciences of good men and compelled them to the use of Ceremonies and Superstitious Worship borrowed from Popery and by him re-introduced into the Church They that would not conform were imprisoned or Banisht He made War upon the Scots twice for no other cause than that By all these actions he has surely deserved the name of a Tyrant once over at least Now I 'le tell you why the word Traytor was put into his Indictment When he assured his Parliament by Promises by Proclamations by Imprecations that he had no design against the State at that very time did he List Papists in Ireland he sent a private Embassie to the King of Denmark to beg assistance from him of Arms Horses and Men expresly against the Parliament and was endeavouring to raise an Army first in England and then in Scotland To the English he promised the Plunder of the City of London to the Scots that the four Northern Counties should be added to Scotland if they would but help him to get rid of the Parliament by what means soever These Projects not succeeding he sent over one Dillon a Traytor into Ireland with private Instructions to the Natives to fall suddenly upon all the English that inhabited there These are the most remarkable instances of his Treasons not taken up upon hear-say and idle reports but discovered by Letters under his own Hand and Seal And finally I suppose no man will deny that he was a Murderer by whose order the Irish took Arms and put to death with most exquisite Torments above a hundred thousand English who lived peaceably by them and without any apprehension of danger and who raised so great a Civil War in the other two Kingdoms Add to all this that at the Treaty in the Isle of Wight the King openly took upon himself the guilt of the War and clear'd the Parliament in the Confession he made there which is publickly known Thus you have in short why King Charles was adjudged a Tyrant a Traytor and a Murderer But say you why was he not declared so before neither in that Solemn League and Covenant nor afterwards when he was delivered to them either by the Presbyterians or the Independents but on the other hand was receiv'd as a King ought to be with all reverence This very thing is sufficient to persuade any rational man that the Parliament entred not into any Councils of quite deposing the King but as their last refuge after they had suffered and undergone all that possibly they could and had attempted all other ways and means You alone endeavour maliciously to lay that to their charge which to all good men cannot but evidence their great Patience Moderation and perhaps a too long forbearing with the King's Pride and Arrogance But in the month of August before the King suffered the House of Commons which then bore the only sway and was governed by the Independants wrote Letters to the Scots in which they acquainted them that they never intended to alter the form of Government that had obtain'd so long in England under King Lords and Commons You may see from henâ—e how little reason there is to ascribe the deposing of the King to the principles of the Independents They that never used to dissemble and conceal their Tenents even then when they had the sole management of affairs profess That they never intended to alter the Government But if afterwards a thing came into their minds which at first they intended not why might they not take such a course tho before not intended as appear'd most advisable and most for the Nation 's Interest Especially when they found that the King could not possibly be intreated or induced to assent to those just demands that they had made from time to time and which were always the same from first to last He persisted in those perverse sentiments with respect to Religion and his own Right which he had all along espoused and which were so destructive to us not in the least altered from the man that he was when in Peace and War he did us all so much mischief If he assented to any thing he gave no obscure hints that he did it against his will and that whenever he should come into power again he would look upon such his Assent as null and void The same thing his Son declared by writing under his hand when in those days he ran away with part of the Fleet and so did the King himself by Letters to some of his own Party in London In the mean time against the avowed sense of the Parliament he struck up a private Peace with the Irish the most barbarous Enemies imaginable to England upon base dishonourable terms but whenever he invited the English to Treaties of Peace at those very times with all the power he had and interest he could make he was preparing for War In this case what should they do who were intrusted with the care of the Government Ought they to have betrayed the safety of us all to our most bitter Adversary Or would you have had them leâ—â— us to undergo the Calamities of another Seven years War not to say worse God put a better mind into them of preferring pursuant to that very solemn League and Covenant their Religion and Liberties before those thoughts they once had of not rejecting the King for they had not gone so far as to vote it all which they saw at last tho indeed later than they might have done could not possibly subsist as long as the King continued King The Parliament ought and must of necessity be entirely free and at liberty to provide for the good of the Nation as occasion requires nor ought they so to be wedded to their first Sentiments as to scruple the altering their minds for their own or the Nation 's good if God put an opportunity into their hands of procuring it But the Scots were of 〈…〉 opinion for they in a Letter to Charles the King's Son call his Father a most Sacred Prince and the putting him to death a most execrable Villany Do not you talk of the Scots whom you know not we know them well enough and know the time when they called that same King a most â—…rable person a Murtherer and Traytor and the putting a Tyrant to Death a most sacred action Then you pick holes in the King's Charge as not being properly penn'd and you ask why we needed to call him a Traytor and a Murtherer after we had stiled him a Tyrant since the word Tyrant includes all the Crimes that may be And then you explain to us grammatically and critically what a Tyrant is Away with those Trisles you Pedagogue which that one definition of Aristotle's that has lately beeen cited will utterly confound
such a Case ought to do and ceas'd to be a King Suppose he should have refused to go out of the Temple and lay down the Government and live alone and had resolved to assert that Kingly Right of not being subject to any Law do you think the Priests and the People of the Jews would have suffered the Temple to be â—…d the Laws violated and live themselves in danger of the Infection It seems there are Laws against a 〈◊〉 King but none against a Tyrant Can any Man possibly be â—o mad and foolish as to fancy that the Laws should â—o far provide for the Peoples Health as tho some noisome Distemper should seize upon the King himself yet to prevent the Infection 's reaching them and make no Provision for the Security of their Lives and Estates and the very being of the whole State against the Tyranny of a cruel unjust Prince which is incomparably the greater mischief of the two But say you there can be no president shown of any one King that has been arâ—aigned in a Court of Justice and 〈…〉 to dye Sichardus answers that well enough â—is all one says he as if one should argue on this manner The Emperor of Germany never was 〈◊〉 to appear before one of the Prince-Electors therefore if the Prince Elector Palatine should Impeach 〈…〉 he were not bound to plead to it tho it appears by the Golden Bull that Charles the 〈◊〉 subjected himself and his Successors to that cognizance and Jurisdiction But no wonder if Kings were indulged in their Ambition and their Exorbitances passed by when the 〈…〉 corrupt and depraved that even private 〈◊〉 if they had either Money or Interest might 〈◊〉 the Law the guilty 〈…〉 of never so high 〈…〉 That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that you speak of that 〈…〉 upon any other and acâ—… Earth which you say is pecuâ—… of Sovereign Princes Aristotle 〈…〉 Book of his 〈◊〉 Câ— 10. calls a most Tyrannical Form of Government and not in the least to be endured by a 〈◊〉 People And that Kings are not liable to be questioned for their Actions you prove by the 〈◊〉 of a very Worthy Author that Barbaâ—… Tyrant Mark 〈◊〉 one of those that subverted 〈◊〉 Commonwealth of Râ—me And yet he himself when he undertook an Expedition against the 〈◊〉 summon'd Herod before him to answer to a Chaâ—ge of Murder and would have punished him 〈◊〉 that Herod brib'd him So that Anthony's â—…ing this Prerogative Royal and your Defence of King Charles come both out of one and the same Spring And 't is very reasonable say you that it should be so for Kings derive their Authority from God alone What Kings are those I pray that do so For I deny that there ever were any such Kings in the World that derived their Authority from God alone Saul the first King of Israel had never reign'd but that the People desired a King even against the Will of God and tho he was proclaimed King once at Mizpah yet after that he lived a private Life and look'd to his Fathers Cattel till he was created so the second time by the People at Gilgal And what think ye of David Tho he had been anointed once by God was he not anointed the second time in Hebron by the Tribe of Judah and after that by all the People of Israel and that after a mutual Covenant betwixt him and them 2 Sam. 5. 1 Chron. 11. Now a Covenant lays an Obligation upon Kings and restrains them within Bounds Solomon you say succeeded him in the throne of the Lord and was acceptable to all men 1 Chron. 29. So that 't is something to be well-pleasing in the Eyes of the People Jehoiadah the Priest made Joash King but first he made him and the People enter into a Covenant to one another 2 Kings 11. I confess that these Kings and all that reign'd of David's Posterity were appointed to the Kingdom both by God and the People but of all other Kings of what Country soever I affirm that they are made so by the People only nor can you make it appear that they are appointed by God any otherwise than as all other things great and small are said to be appointed by him because nothing comes to pass without his Providence So that I allow the Throne of David was in a peculiar manner call'd The throne of the Lord whereas the Thrones of other Princes are no otherwise God's than all other things in the World are his which if you would you might have learnt out of the same Chapter Ver. 11 12. Thine O Lord is the greatness c. for all that is in the Heaven and in the Earth is thine Both riches and honour come of thee and thou reignest over all And this is so often repeated not to puff up Kings but to put them in mind tho they think themselves Gods that yet there is a God above them to whom they owe whatever they are and have And thus we easily understand what the Poets and the Essenes among the Jews mean when they tell us That 't is by God that Kings reign and that they are of Jupiter for so all of us are of God we are all his Off-spring So that this universal Right of Almighty God's and the Interest that he has in Princes and their Thrones and all that belongs to them does not at all derogate from the Peoples Right but that notwithstanding all this all other Kings not particularly and by name appointed by God owe their Soveraignty to the People only and consequently are accountable to them for the management of it The truth of which Doctrine tho the Common People are apt to flatter their Kings yet they themselves acknowledge whether good ones as Sarpedon in Homer is described to have been or bad ones as those Tyrants in Hâ—race 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Glaucus in Lycia we 're ador'd like Gods What makes 'twixt us and others so great odds He resolves the Question himself Because says he we excel others in Heroical Virtues Let us fight manfully then says he lest our Country-men tax us with Sloth and Cowardize In which words he intimates to us both that Kings derive their Grandeur from the People and that for their Conduct and Behaviour in War they are accountable to them Bad Kings indeed tho to cast some Terror into Peoples minds and beget a Reverence of themselves they declare to the World that God only is the Author of Kingly Government in their Hearts and Minds they reverence no other Deity but that of Fortune according to that passage in Horace Te Dacus asper te profugi Schythae Regumque matres barbarorum Purpurei metuunt Tyranni Injurioso ne pede proruas Stantem columnam neu populus frequens Ad arma cessantes ad arma Concitet imperiumque frangat All barb'rous People and their Princes too All Purple Tyrants honour you The very wandring Scythians do Support the Pillar
tents O Israel now look to thine own house David When the King sent Adoram to them they stoned him with Stones and perhaps they would not have stuck to have serv'd the King himself so but he made haste and got out of the way The next News is of a great Army rais'd by Rehoboam to reduce the Israelites to their Allegiance God forbids him to proceed Go not up says he to war against your brethren the children of Israel for this thing is of me Now consider heretofore the People had desired a King God was displeased with them for it but yet permitted them to make a King according to that Right that all Nations have to appoint their own Governors Now the People reject Rehoboam from ruling them and this God not only suffers them to do but forbids Rehoboam to make War against them for it and stops him in his undertaking and teaches him withal that those that had Revolted from him were not Rebels in so doing but that he ought to look upon them as Brethren Now recollect your self You say that all Kings are of God and that therefore the People ought not to resist them be they never such Tyrants I answer you The Convention of the People their Votes their Acts are likewise of God and that by the Testimony of God himself in this place and consequently according to your Argument by the Authority of God himself Princes ought not to resist the People For as certain as it is that Kings are of God and whatever Argument you may draw from thence to enforce a Subjection and Obedience to them So certain is it that free Assemblies of the Body of the People are of God and that naturally affords the same Argument for their Right of restraining Princes from going beyond their Bounds and rejecting them if there be occasion nor is their so doing a justifiable Cause of War any more than the People of Israel's rejecting Rehoboam was You ask why the People did not revolt from Solomon Who but you would ask such an impertinent Question You see they did revolt from a Tyrant and were neither punished nor blam'd for it It is true Solomon fell into some Vices but he was not therefore a Tyrant he made amends for his Vices by many excellent Virtues that he was famous for by many Benefits which accrued to the Nation of the Jews by his Government But admit that he had been a Tyrant Many times the Circumstances of a Nation are such that the People will not and many times such that they cannot depose a Tyrant You see they did it when it was in their Power But say you Jeroboam's Act was ever had in Detestation 't was looked upon as an unjust revolt from a lawful Prince he and his Succssors were accounted Rebels I confess we find his Revolt from the true Worship of God often found fault with but I no where find him blam'd for revolting from Rehoboam and his Successors are frequently spoken of as wicked Princes but not as Rebels Acting contrary to Law and Right say you cannot introduce or establish a Right I pray what becomes then of your Right of Kings Thus do you perpetually bastle your self You say Adulteries Murders Thefts are daily committed with impunity Are you not aware that here you give an Answer to your own Question how it comes to pass that Tyrants do so often escape unpunished You say Those Kings were Rebels and yet the Prophets do no where disswade the People from their Allegiance And why do you ye Rascally false Prophet endeavour to persuade the People of England not to yield Obedience to their present Magistrates tho in your Opinion they are Rebels This English Faction of Robbers say you alledge for themselves that by some immediate Voice from Heaven they were put upon their bloody Enterprize It is notoriously evident that you were distracted when you wrote these Lines for as you have put the words together they are neither Latin nor Sense And that the English pretend to any such warrant as a Justification of their Actions is one of those many Lies and Fictions that your Book is full of But I proceed to urge you with Examples Libna a great City revolted from Jorom because he had forsaken God 't was the King therefore that was guilty not the City nor is the City blam'd for it He that considers the reason that 's given why that City rejected his Government must conclude that the Holy Ghost rather approves of what they did then condemns them for it These kind of revolts are no presidents say you But why were you then so vain as to promise in the beginning of this Chapter that you would arguâ— from Examples whereas all the Examples that you alledg are mere Negatives which prove nothing and when we urge Examples that are solid and positive you say they are no Presidents Who would endure such a way of Arguing You challenged us at Presidents we produced them and what do you do You hang back and get out of the way I proceed Jebu at the Command of a Prophet slew a King nay he ordered the Death of Ahaziah his own Liege Prince If God would not have Tyrants put to Death by their own Subjects if it were a wicked thing so to do a thing of a bad Example why did God himself command it If he commanded it it was a lawful commendable and a praise-worthy Action It was not therefore lawful to kill a Tyrant because God commanded it but God commanded it because antecedently to his Command it was a justifiable and a lawful Action Again Jehoiada the High Priest did not scruple to depose Athaliah and kill her tho she had been seven years in actual Possession of the Crown But say you she took upon her the Government when she had no Right to it And did not you say your self but a while ago That Tiberius assumed the Soveraignty when it belonged not at all to him And yet you then affirm'd that according to our Saviour's Doctrine we ought to yield Obedience to such Tyrants as he was 'twere a most ridiculous thing to imagine that a Prince who gets in by Usurpation may lawfully be deposed but one that Rules tyrannically may not But say you Athaliah could not possibly Reign according to the Law of the Jewish Kingdom Thou shalt set over thee a King says God Almighty he does not say Thou shalt set over thee a Queen If this Argument have any weight I may as well say The Command of God was that the People should set over themselves a King not a Tyrant So that I 'm even with you Amazias was a Slothful Idolatrous Prince and was put to Death not by a few Conspirators but rather it should seem by the the Nobility and by the Body of the People For he fled from Jerusalem had none to stand by him and they pursued him to Lachish They took Counsel against him says the History because he had
forsaken God And we do not find that Azarias his Son prosecuted those that had cut off his Father You quote a great many frivolous passages out of the Rabbins to prove that the Kings of the Jews were Superior to the Sanhedrim You do not consider Zedekia's own words Jerem. 38. The King is not he that can do any thing against you So that this was the Princes own stile Thus he confessed himself Inferior to the great Council of the Realm Perhaps say you he meant that he durst not deny them any thing for fear of Sedition But what does your perhaps signify whose most positive asserting any thing is not worth a Louse For nothing in Nature can be more Fickle and Inconstant than you are How oft have you appear'd in this Discourse inconsistent with your self unsaying with one Breath what you had said with another Here again you make Comparisons betwixt King Charles and some of the good Kings of Judah You speak contemptibly of David as if he were not worthy to come in Competition with him Consider David say you an Adulterer a Murderer King Charles was guilty of no such Crimes Solomon his Son who was accounted wise c. Who can with Patience hear this filthy rascally Fool speak so irreverently of Persons eminent both in Greatness and Piety Dare you compare King David with King Charles a most Religious King and Prophet with a Superstitious Prince and who was but a Novice in the Christian Religion a most prudent wise Prince with a weak one a Valiant Prince with a Cowardly one finally a most just Prince with a most unjust one Have you the impudence to commend his Chastity and Sobriety who is known to have committed all manner of Leudness in company with his Confident the Duke of Buckingham It were to no purpose to enquire into the private Actions of his Life who publickly at Plays would Embrace and Kiss the Ladies lasciviously and handle Virgins and Matrons Breasts not to mention the rest I advise you therefore you Counterfeit Plutarch to abstain from such like Parallels lest I be forced to publish those things concerning King Charles which I am willing to conceal Hitherto we have entertain'd our selves with what the People of the Jews have acted or attempted against Tyrants and by what Right they did it in those times when God himself did immediately as it were by his Voice from Heaven govern their Commonwealth The Ages that succeeded do not afford us any Authority as from themselves but confirm us in our Opinion by their imitating the Actions of their Fore-fathers For after the Babylonish Captivity when God did not give any new command concerning the Crown tho the Royal Line was not extinct we find the People returning to the old Mosaical Form of Government again They were one while Tributaries to Antiochus King of Syria yet when he injoyn'd them things that were contrary to the Law of God they resisted him and his Deputies under the Conduct of their Priests the Maccabees and by force regain'd their former Liberty After that whoever was accounted most worthy of it had the Principality conferr'd upon him Till at last Hircanus the Son of Simon the Brother of Judah the Maccabee having spoiled David's Sepulchre entertain'd foreign Soldiers and began to Invest the Priesthood with a kind of Regal Power After whose time his Son Aristobulus was the first that assum'd the Crown he was a Tyrant indeed and yet the People stirred not against him which is no great Wonder for he reigned but one year And he himself being overtaken with a grievous Disease and repenting of his own Cruelty and Wickedness desired nothing more than to dye and had his wish His Brother Alexander succeeded him and against him you say the People raised no Insurrection tho he were a Tyrant too And this lie might have gone down with us if Josepbus's History had not been extant We should then have had no memory of those times but what your Josippus would afford us out of whom you transcribe a few senseless and useless Apothegms of the Pharisees The History is thus Alexander Administred the Publick Affairs ill both in War and Peace and tho he kept in pay great numbers of Pisidians and Cilicians yet could he not protect himself from the Rage of the People but whilest he was Sacrificing they fell upon him and had almost smother'd him with Boughs of Palm-trees and Citron-trees afterward the whole Nation made War upon him six years during which time when many thousands of the Jews had been slain and he himself being at length desirous of Peace demanded of them what they would have him do to satisfy them they told him nothing could do that but his Blood nay that they should hardly pardon him after his Death This History you perâ—… was not for your purpose and so you put it 〈◊〉 with a few â—harisaical Sentences when it had been much better either to have let it quite alone 〈◊〉 to have given a true Relation of it but you trust to â—ies more than to the Truth of your Cause Even 〈◊〉 eight hundred Pharisees whom he commanded to be crucisied were of their number that had taken up Arms against him And they with the rest of the People had solemnly protested That if they could subdue the Kings Forces and get his Person into their Power they would put him to Death After the Death of Alexander his Wife Alexandra took the Government upon her as Athalia had formerly done not according to Law for you have confessed that the Laws of the Jews admitted not a Female to wear the Crown but she got it partly by force for she maintain'd an Army of Foreigners and partly by favour for she had brought over the Pharisees to her Interest which sort of Men were of the greaten Authority with the People Them she had made her own by putting the Power into their hands and retaining to her self only the Name 〈◊〉 as the Scotch Presbyterians lately allowed Chaâ—… the Name of King but upon Condition that 〈◊〉 would let them be King in effect After the 〈◊〉 of Alexandra Hyrcanus and Aristobulus her Sons contended for the Sovereignty Aristobulus was 〈◊〉 industrious and having a greater Party forced his Elder Brother out of the Kingdom A while after when Pompey passed through Syria in his return from the Mithridatick War the Jews supposing they had now an opportunity of regaining their Liberty by referring their Cause to him dispatcht an Embassy to him in their own Names they renounce both the Brothers complain that they had enslaved them Pompey deposed Aristobulus leaves the Priesthood and such a Principality as the Laws allowed to Hyrcanus the Elder From that time forward he was called High Priest and Ethnarcha After these times in the Reign of Archelaus the Son of Herod the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fifty Ambassadors to Augustus Caesar accused 〈◊〉 that was dead and Archelaus his Son that then Reigned they deposed him as
what Seneca himself and all good Men even in Nero's time thought was fit to be done to a Tyrant and how vertuous an Action how acceptable to God they thought it to kill one So every good Man of Rome as far as in him lay kill'd Domitian Pliny the Second owns it openly in his Panegyrick to Trajan the Emperor We took pleasure in dashing those proud Looks against the Ground in piercing him with our Swords in mangling him with Axes as if he had bled and felt pain at every stroke No man could so command his passion of Joy but that he counted it a piece of Revenge to behold his mangled Limbs his Members torn asunder and after all his stern and horâ—â—â— Statues thrown down and burnt And afterwards They cannot love good Princes enough that cannot hate bad ones as they deserve Then amongst other Enormities of Domitian he reckons this for one that he put to Death Epâ—phroditus that had kill'd Nero Had we forgotten the avenging Nero's Death Was it likely that he would suffer his Life and Actions to be ill spoken of whose Death he revenged He seems to have thought it almost a Crime not to kill Nero that counts it so great a one to punish him that did it By what has been said it is evident that the best of the Romans did not only kill Tyrants as oft as they could and howsoever they could but that they thought it a commendable and a praise-worthy Action so to do as the Grecians had done before them For when they could not proceed judicially against a Tyrant in his life-time being interior to him in Strength and Power yet after his Death they did it and condemn'd him by the Valerian Law For Valerius Publicola Junius Brutus his Colleague when he saw that Tyrants being guarded with Soldiers could not be brought to a legal Tryal he devised a Law to make it lawful to kill them any way tho uncondemn'd and that they that did it should afterwards give an account of their so doing Hence when Cassius had actually run Caligula through with a Sword tho every Body else had done it in their hearts Valerius Asiaticus one that had been Consul being present at the time cried out to the Soldiers that began to Mutiny because of his Death I wish I my self had kill'd him And the Senate at the same time was so far from being displeased with Cassius for what he had done that they resolved to extirpate the Memory of the Emperors and to raze the Temples that had been erected in Honour of them When Claudius was presently saluted Emperor by the Soldiers they forbad him by the Tribune of the People to take the Government upon him but the Power of the Soldiers prevailed The Senate declared Nero an Enemy and made enquiry after him to have punished him according to the Law of their Ancestors which required that he should be stript naked and hung by the Neck upon a forked Stake and whipt to Death Consider now how much more mildly and moderately the English dealt with their Tyrant tho many are of Opinion that he caused the spilling of more Blood than ever Nero himself did So the Senate condemn'd Domitian after his Death they commanded his Statues to be pull'd down and dash'd in pieces which was all they could do When Commodus was slain by his own Officers neither the Senate nor the People punisht the Fact but declared him an Enemy and enquired for his dead Corps to have made it an Example An Act of the Senate made upon that occasion is extant in Lampridius Let the Enemy of his Country be depriv'd of all his Titles let the Parricide be drawn let him be torn in pieces in the Spoliary let the Enemy of the gods the Executioner of the Senate be drag'd with a Hake c. The same Persons in a very full Senate condemn'd Didius Julianus to Death and sent a Tribune to slay him in the Palace The same Senate deposed Maximinus and declared him an Enemy Let us hear the words of the Decree of the Senate concerning him as Capitolinus relates it The Consul put the question Conscript Fathers what is your pleasure concerning the Maximines They answered They are Enemies they are Enemies who ever kills them shall be rewarded Would you know now whether the People of Rome and the Provinces of the Empire obeyed the Senate or Maximine the Emperor Hear what the same Author says The Senate wrote Letters into all the Provinces requiring them to take care of their Common Safety and Liberty the Letters were publickly read And the Friends the Deputies the Generals the Tribunes the Soldiers of Maximine were slain in all places very few Cities were found that kept their Faith with the publick Enemy Herodian relates the same thing But what need we give any more Instances out of the Roman Histories Let us now see what manner of thing the Right of Kings was in those days in the Nations that bordered upon the Empire Ambiorix a King of the Gauls confesseth The Nature of his Dominion to be such that the People have as great Power over him as he over them And consequently as well as he judged them he might be judged by them Vercingetorix another King in Gaul was accused of Treason by his own People These things Caesar relates in his History of the Gallick Wars Neither is the Regal Power among the Germans absolute and uncontroulable lesser matters are ordered and disposed by the Princes greater Affairs by all the People The King or Prince is more considerable by the Authority of his Persuasions than by any Power that he has of Commanding If his Opinion be not approv'd of they declare their dislike of it by a general murmuring Noise This is out of Tacitus Nay and you your self now confess that what but of late you exclaim'd against as an unheard of thing has been often done to wit That no less than fifty Scotish Kings have been either Banished or Imprisoned or put to Death nay and some of them publickly executed Which having come to pass in our very Island why do you as if it were your Office to conceal the violent Deaths of Tyrants by burying them in the dark exclaim against it as an abominable and unheard of thing You proceed to commend the Jews and Christians for their Religious Obearence even to Tyrants and to heap one lye upon another all which I have already conâ—uted you in Of late you made large Enccmiums of the Obedience of the Assyrians and Persians and now you reckon up their Rebellions and tho but of late you said they never had Rebell'd at all now you give us a great many reasons why they Rebell'd so often Then you resume the Narrative of the manner of our King's Death which you had broken off long since that if you had not taken care suâ—â—iâ—ntly to appear ridiculous and a Fool then you may do it now You said He was led through the Members of
Will both of Senate and People gets as great a number as he can either of Enemies or profligate Subjects to side with him against the Senate and the People The Parliament therefore allowed the King as they did whatever he had besides the setting up of a Standard not to wage War against his own people but to defend them against such as the Parliament should declare Enemies to the State If he acted otherwise himself was to be accounted an Enemy since according to the very Law of St. Edward or according to a more sacred Law than that the Law of Nature it self he lost the name of a King and was no longer such Whence Cicero in his Philip. He forfeits his Command in the Army and Interest in the Government that employs them against the State Neither could the King compel those that held of him by Knight-Service to serve him in any other War than such as was made by consent of Parliament which is evident by many Statutes So for Customs and other Subsidies for the maintenance of the Navy the King could not exact them without an Act of Parliament as was resolved about twelve years ago by the ablest of our Lawyers when the King's Authority was at the height And long before them Fortescue an Eminent Lawyer and Chancellor to King Henry the 6th The King of England says he can neither alter the Laws nor exact Subsidies without the people's consent nor can any Testimonies be brought from Antiquity to prove the Kingdom of England to have been merely Regal The King says Bracton has a Jurisdiction over all his Subjects that is in his Courts of Justice where Justice is administred in the King's name indeed but according to our own Laws All are subject to the King that is every particular man is and so Bracton explains himself in the places that I have cited What follows is but turning the same stone over and over again at which sport I believe you are able to tire Sisiphus himself and is sufficiently answered by what has been said already For the rest if our Parliaments have sometimes complimented good Kings with submissive expressions tho neither favouring of Flattery nor Slavery those are not to be accounted due to Tyrants nor ought to prejudice the peoples Right good manners and civility do not infringe Liberty Whereas you cite out of Sir Edw. Coke and others That the Kingdom of England is an Absolute Kingdom that is said with respect to any Foreign Prince or the Emperor because as Cambden says It is not under the Patronage of the Emperor but both of them affirm that the Government of England resides not in the King alone but in a Body Politick Whence Fortescue in his Book de laud. leg Angl. cap. 9. The King of England says he governs his people not by a merely Regal but a Political power for the English are govern'd by Laws of their own making Foreign Authors were not ignorant of this Hence Philip de Comines a Grave Author in the Fifth Book of his Commentaries Of all the Kingdoms of the earth says he that I have any knowledge of there is none in my opinion where the Government is more moderate where the King has less power of hurting his people than in England Finally 'T is ridiculous say you for them to affirm that Kingdoms were ancienter than Kings which is as much as if they should say that there was Light before the Sun was created But with your good leave Sir we do not say that Kingdoms but that the people were before Kings In the mean time who can be more ridiculous than you who deny there was Light before the Sun had a being You pretend to a curiosity in other mens matters and have forgot the very first things that were taught you You wonder how they that have seen the King upon his Throne at a Session of Parliament sub aureo serico Coelo under a golden and silken Heaven under a Canopy of State should so much as make a question whether the Majesty resided in him or in the Parliament They are certainly hard of belief whom so lucid an Argument coming down from Heaven cannot convince Which Golden Heaven you like a Stoick have so devoutly and seriously gaz'd upon that you seem to have forgot what kind of Heaven Moses and Aristotle describe to us for you deny that there was any Light in Moses his Heaven before the Sun and in Aristotle's you make three temperate Zones How many Zones you observed in that Golden and Silken Heaven of the King 's I know not but I know you got one Zone a Purse well tempered with a Hundred Golden Stars by your Astronomy CHAP. X. SInce this whole Controversie whether concerning the Right of Kings in general or that of the King of England in particular is rendred difficult and intricate rather by the obstinacy of parties than by the nature of the thing it self I hope they that prefer Truth before the Interest of a Faction will be satisfied with what I have alledged out of the Law of God the Law of Nations and the Municipal Laws of my own Countrey That a King of England may be brought to Tryal and put to Death As for those whose minds are either blinded with Superstition or so dazeled with the Splendor and Grandure of a Court that Magnanimity and true Liberty do not appear so glorious to them as they are in themselves it will be in vain to contend with them either by Reason and Arguments or Examples But you Salmasius seem very absurd as in every other part of your Book so particularly in this who tho you â—ail perpetually at the Independents and revile them with all the terms of Reproach imaginable yet assert to the highest degree that can be the Independâ—ncy of the King whom you defend and will not allow him to owe his Soveraignty to the people but to his Descent And whereas in the beginning of your Book you complain'd that he was put to plead for his Life here yâ—u complain That he perish'd without being heard to spâ—… for himself But if you have a mind to look into the History of his Trial which is very faithfully publish'd in French it may be you 'l be of another opinion Whereas he had liberty given him for some day together to say what he could for himself he made use of it not to clear himself of the Crimes 〈◊〉 to his Charge but to disprove the Authority oâ— his Judges and the Judicature that he was called before And whenever a Criminal is either mute or says nothing to the purpose there is no Injustice in condemning him without hearing him if his Crimes are notorious and publickly known If you say that Charles dyed as he lived I agree with you If you say that he died piously holily and at ease you may remember that his Grandmother Mary Queen of Scots and infamous Woman dyed on a Scaffold with as much outward appearance of
that may save in all thy cities and thy judges of whom thou saidest give me a king and princes I gave thâ—â— a king in mine anger and took him 〈…〉 my wrath And Gidem that warlike Judg that was greater than a King I will not rule over you says he 〈…〉 shall my son rule over you the Lord shall rule over you Judges Chap the 8th Intimating thereby that it is not fit for a man but for God only to exercise Dominion over men And hence Josephus in his Book against Aâ—… an Egyptian Grammarian and a â—oulmouth'd fellow like you calls the Commonwealth of the Hebrews a Theocracy because the principality was in God only In Isaiah Chap. 26. v. 13. The people in their repentance complain that it had been mischievous to them that other Lords besides God himself had had Dominion over them All which places prove clearly that God gave the Israelites a King in his anger but now who can forbear laughing at the use you make of Abimelech's story Of whom it is said when he was kill'd partly by a woman that hurl'd a piece of a Mill-stone upon him and partly by his own Armour-Bearer that God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech This History say you proves strongly that God only is the Judge and Avenger of Kings Yea if this Argument holds he is the only Judge and Punisher of Tyrants Villanous Rascals and Bastards whoever can get into the Saddle whether by right or by wrong has thereby obtain'd a Soveraign Kingly right over the people is out of all danger of punishment all inferior Magistrates must lay down their Arms at his feet the people must not dare to mutter But what if some great notorious robber had perished in War as Abimelech did would any man infer from thence That God only is the Judge and Punisher of High-way men Or what if Abimelech had been condemn'd by the Law and died by an Executioner's hand would not God then have rendred his wickedness You never read that the Judges of the Children of Israel were ever proceeded against according to Law And yet you confess That where the Government is an Aristocracy the Prince if there be any may and ought to be call'd in question if he break the Laws This in your 47th Page And why may not a Tyrant as well be proceeded against in a Kingly Government Why because God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech So did the Women and so did his own Armour-bearer over both which he pretended to a right of Soveraignty And what if the Magistrates had rendred his wickedness Do not they bear the Sword for that very purpose for the punishment of Malefactors Having done with his powerful argument from the History of Abimelech's death he bâ—takes himself as his custom is to Slanders and Calumnies nothing but dirt and filth comes from him but for those things that he promis'd to make appear he hath not prov'd any one of them either from the Scriptures or from the Writings of the Rabbins He alledges no reason why Kings should be above all Laws and they only of all mortal men exempt from punishment if they deserve it He falls foul upon those very Authors and Authorities that he makes use of and by his own Discourse demonstrates the truth of the opinion that he argues against And perceiving that he is like to do but little good with his arguments he endeavours to bring an odium upon us by loading us with slanderous accusations as having put to death the most Vertuous innocent Prince that ever reign'd VVas King Solomon says he better than King Charles the First I confess some have ventur'd to compare his Father King James with Solomon nay to make King James the better Gentleman of the 〈◊〉 Solomon was David's Son David had been Sauâ—… â—…n but king James was the Son of the End of Darly who as â—uchanan tells us because Dâ—… the Musitian get into the Queen's Bed-Chamber at an unseasonable time kill'd him a little after he could not get to him then because he had Bolted the Door on the inside So that King James being the Son of an Earâ— was the better Gentleman and was frequently called a second Solomon though it is not very certain that himself was not the Son of David the Musitian too But how could it ever come into your head to make a comparison betwixt King Câ—ries and Solomon For that very King Charles whom you praise thus to the sky that very man's obâ—…acy and covetousness and cruelty his hard usage of all good and honest men the Wars that he rais'd the Spoilings and Plunderings and Conflagrations that he occasioned and the death of innumerable of his Subjects that he was the cause of does his Son Charles at this very time whilest I 'm a writing confess and bewail in the Stool of Repentance in Scotland and renounces there that Kingly right that you assert but since you delight in Parallels let 's compare King Charles and King Solomon together a little Solomon began his reign with the death of his Brother who had justly deserved it King Charles began his with his Father's Funeral I do not say with his Murder and yet all the marks and tokens of Poyson that may be appeared in his dead body but the suspition lighted upon the Duke of Buckingham only whom the 〈◊〉 notwithstanding cleared to the Parliament though he had killed the King and his Father and not only soâ— but he dissolved the Parliament lest the matter should be enquired into Solomon oppressed the people with heavy Taxes but he spent that â—…upon the Temple of God and in raising other publick Buildings King Charles spent his in Extravag 〈◊〉 Solomon was enticed to Idolatry by many Wives This man by one Solomon though he were seduced himself we read not that he seduced others but King Charles seduced and enticed others not only by large and ample rewards to corrupt the Church but by his Edicts and Ecclesiastical Constitutions he compelled them to set up Altars which all Protestants abhor and to bow down to Crucifixes painted over them on the Wall But yet for all this Solomon was not condemned to die Nor does it follow because he was not that therefore he ought not to have been Perhaps there were many Circumstances that made it then not expedient But not long after the people both by words and actions made appear what they took to be their right when Ten Tribes of Twelve revolted from his Son and if he had not saved himself by flight it is very likely they would have stoned him notwithstanding his Threats and big swelling words CHAP. III. HAving proved sufficiently that the Kings of the Jews were subject to the same Laws that the people were That there are no exceptions made in Scripture That 't is a most false assertion grounded upon no reason nor warranted by any Authority to say That Kings may do what they list with Impunity That God has exempted them
Partner in the Soveraign Power because he molested the Eastern Christians by which act of his he declared thus much at least That one Magistrate might punish another for he for his Subjects take punished â—icinius who to all intents was as abso 〈◊〉 in the Empire as himself and did not leave the vengeance to God alone Licinius might have done the same to Constantine if there had been the like occasion So then if the matter be not wholly reserved to Gods own Tribunal but that men have something to do in the case why did not the Parliament of England stand in the same relation to King Charles that Constantine did to Licinius The Soldiers made Constantine what he was But our Laws have made our Parliaments equal nay superior to our Kings The Inhabitants of Constantinople resisted Constantius an Arrian Emperour by force of Arms as long as they were able they opposed Hermogenes whom he had sent with a Military power to depose Paul an Orthodox Bishop the house whither he had betaken himself for security they fired about his ears and at last killed him right out Constans threatned to make War upon his Brother Constantius unless he would restore Paul and Athanasius to their Bishopricks You see those holy Fathers when their Bishopricks were in danger were not ashamed to stir up their Prince's own Brother to make War upon him Not long after the Christian Soldiers who then made whom they would Emperors put to death Constans the Son of Constantinus because he behaved himself dissolutely and proudly in the Government and Translated the Empire to Magnentius Nay those very persons that saluted Julian by the name of Emperour against Constantius his will who was actually in possession of the Empire for Julian was not then an Apostate but a vertuous and valiant person are they not amongst the number of those Primitive Christians whose Example you propose to us for our imitation which action of theirs when Constantius by his Letters to the people very sharply and earnestly forbad which Letters were openly read to them they all cried out unanimously That themselves had but done what the Provincial Magistrates the Army and the Authority of the Commonwealth had decreed The same persons declared War against Constantius and contributed as much as in them lay to deprive him both of his Government and his Life How did the Inhabitants of Antioch behave themselves who were none of the worst sort of Christians I 'le warrant you they prayed for Julian after he became an Apostate whom they used to rail at in his own presence and scoffing at his long Beard bid him make Ropes of it Upon the news of whose death they gave publick Thanksgivings made Feasts and gave other publick Demonstrations of Joy do you think they used when he was alive to pray for the continuance of his life and health Nay is it not reported that a Christian Soldier in his own Army was the Author of his Death Sozomen a Writer of the Ecclesiastical History does not deny it but commends him that did it if the fact were so For it is no wonder says he that some of his own Soldiers might think within himself that not only the Greeks but all Mankind hitherto had agreed that it was a commendable action to kill a Tyrant and that they deserve all mens praise who are willing to die themselves to procure the liberty of all others so that that Soldier ought not rashly to be condemned who in the cause of God and of Religion was so zealous and valiant These are the words of Sozomen a good and Religious man of that age by which we may easily apprehend what the general opinion of pious men in those days was upon this point Ambrose himself being commanded by the Emperour Valentinian the Younger to depart from Milan refused to obey him but defended himself and the Palace by force of Arms against the Emperour's Officers and took upon him contrary to his own Doctrine to resist the higher powers There was a great sedition raised at Constantinople against the Emperour Areadius more than once by reason of Chrysostom's Exile Hitherto I have shewn how the Primitive Christians behaved themselves towards Tyrants how not only the Christian Soldiers and the people but the Fathers of the Church themselves have both made War upon them and opposed them with force and all this before St. Austin's time for you your self are pleased to go down no lower and therefore I make no mention of Valentinian the Son of Placidia who was slain by Maximus a Senator for committing Adultery with his Wife nor do I mention Avitus the Emperour whom because he disbanded the Soldiers and betook himself wholly to a luxurious life the Roman Senate immediately deposed because these things came to pass some years after St. Austin's death But all this I give you Suppose I had not mentioned the practice of the Primitive Christians suppose they never had stirred in opposition to Tyrants suppose they had accounted it unlawful so do I will make it appear that they were not such persons as that we ought to â—ely upon their Authority or can safely follow their Example Long before Constantine's time the generality of Christians had lost much of the Primitive Sanctity and integity both of their Doctrine and Manners Afterwards when he had vastly enriched the Church they began to fall in love with Honour and Civil Power and then the Christian Religion went to wrack First Luxury and Sloth and then a great drove of Herches and Immoralities broke loose among them and these begot Envy Hatred and Discord which abounded every where At last they that were linked together into one Brotherhood by that holy band of Religion were as much at variance and strife amongst themselves as the most bitter Enemies in the world could be No reverence for no consideration of their duty was left amongst them the Soldiers and Commanders of the Army as oft as they pleased themselves created new Emperors and sometimes killed good ones as well as bad I need not mention such as Verannio Alaximus Eugenius whom the Soldiers all on a sudden advanced and made them Emperors nor Gratian an excellent Prince nor Valentinian the younger who was none of the worst and yet were put to death by them It is true these things were acted by the Soldiers and Soldiers in the field but those Soldiers were Christians and lived in that Age which you call Evangelical and whose example you propose to us for our imitation Now you shall hear how the Clergy managed themselves Pastors and Bishops and sometimes those very Fathers whom we admire and extol to so high a degree every one of whom was a Leader of their several Flocks those very men I say fought for their Bishopricks as Tyrants did for their Soveraignty sometimes throughout the City sometimes in the very Churches sometimes at the Altar Clergy-men and Lay-men fought promiscuously they slew one another and great
were turned into so many Tyrannies and the Subjects began to conspire the Death of their Governors neither were they the profligate sort sort that were the Authors of those Designs but the most Generous and Magnanimous I could quote many 〈◊〉 like passage but I shall instance in no more 〈…〉 Philosophers you appeal to the Poets and 〈…〉 willing to follow you thither Aeschylus 〈…〉 to inform us That the Power of the Kings of 〈…〉 as not to be liable to the censure of any 〈…〉 questioned before any Human Judicature â—…gedy that is called The Suppliants calls 〈…〉 Argives a Governor not obnoxious to th◠〈…〉 any Tribunal But you must know for 〈…〉 you say the more you discover your rashness and want of judgment you must know I say that one is not to regard what the Poet says but what person in the Play speaks and what that person says for different persons are introduced sometimes good sometimes bad sometimes wise men sometimes fools and such words are put into their mouths as it is most proper for them to speak not such as the Poet would speak if he were to speak in his own person The Fifty Daughters of Danaus being banished out of Egypt became Suppliants to the King of the Argives they begg'd of him that he would protect them from the Egyptians who pursued them with a Fleet of Ships The King told them he could not undertake their Protection till he had imparted the matter to the people For says he if I should make a promise to you I should not be able to perform it unless I consult with them first The Women being Strangers and Suppliants and fearing the uncertain suffrages of the people tell him That the Power of all the people resides in him alone that he judges all others but is not judged himself by any He answers I have told you already That I cannot do this thing that you desire of me without the peoples consent nay and tho I could I would not At last he refers the matter to the people I will assemble the people says he and persuade them to protect you The people met and resolved to engage in their quarrel insomuch that Danaus their Father bids his Daughters be of good cheer for the people of the Countrey in a Popular Convention had voted their Safeguard and Defence If I had not related the whole thing how rashly would this impertinent Ignoramus have determined concerning the Right of Kings among the Grecians out of the mouths of a few Women that were Strangers and Suppliants tho the King himself and the History be quite contrary The same thing appears by the story of Orestes in Euripides who after his Father's Death was himself King of the Argives and yet was called in question by the people for the death of his Mother and made to plead for his Life and by the major suffrage was condemned to dye The same Poet in his Play called The Suppliants declares That at Athens the Kingly Power was subject to the Laws where Theseus then King of that City is made to say these words This is a free City it is not governed by one man the people reigns here And his Son Demophoon who was King after him in another Tragedy of the same Poet called Hâ—raclidae I do not exercise a Tyrannical power over them as if they were Barbarians I am upon other terms with them but if I do them Justice they will do me the like Sophocles in his Oedipus shows That anciently in Thebes the Kings were not absolute neither Hence says Tiresias to Oedipus I am not your Slave And Creon to the same King I have some Right in this City says he as well as you And in another Tragedy of the same Poet called Antigone Aemon tells the King That the City of Thebes is not govern'd by a single person All men know that the Kings of Lacedemon have been arraigned and sometimes put to death judicially These instances are sufficient to evince what Power the Kings in Greece had Let us consider now the Romans You betake your self to that passage of C. Memmius in Salust of Kings having a liberty to do what they list and go unpunished to which I have given an answer already Salust himself says in express words That the Ancient Government of Rome was by their Laws tho the Name and Form of it was Regal which form of Government when it grew into a Tyranny you know they put down and changed Cicero in his Oration against Piso Shall I says he account him a Consul who would not allow the Senate to have any Authority in the Common-wealth Shall I take notice of any man as Consul if at the same there be no such thing as a Senate when of old the City of Rome acknowledged not their Kings if they acted without or in opposition to the Senate Do you hear the very Kings themselves at Rome signified nothing without the Senate But say you Romulus governed as he listed and for that you quote Tacitus No wonder The Government was not then established by Law they were a confus'd multitude of strangers more like than a State and all mankind lived without Laws before Governments were setled But when Romulus was dead tho all the people were desirous of a King not having yet experienced the sweetness of Liberty yet as Livy informs us The Soveraign Power resided in the People so that they parted not with more Right than they retained The same Author tells us That that same Power was afterwards extorted from them by their Emperours Servius Tullius at first reigned by fraud and as it were a Deputy to Tarquinius Priscus but afterward he referred it to the people Whether they would have him reign or no At last says Tacitus he became the Author of such Laws as the Kings were obliged to obey Do you think he would have done such an injury to himself and his Posterity if he had been of opinion that the Right of Kings had been above all Laws Their last King Tarquinius Superbus was the first that put an end to that custom of consulting the Senate concerning all Publick Affairs for which very thing and other enormities of his the people deposed him and banished him and his Family These things I have out of Livy and Cicero than whom you will hardly produce any better Expositors of the Right of Kings among the Romans As for the Dictatorship that was but Temporary and was never made use of but in great extremities and was not to continue longer than six months But that thing which you call the Right of the Roman Emperors was no Right but a plain downright Force and was gained by War only But Tacitus say you that lived under the Government of a single person writes thus The Gods have committed the Sovereign Power in human Affairs to Princes only and have left to Subjects the honour of being obedient But you tell us not where Tacitus has these
Dâ—…s Commanders of Armies that were to command the Forces of the several Counties not for the Honour of the Crown only but for the good of the Realm And they were chosen `by the General Council and in the several Counties at publick Assemblies of the Inhabitants as Sheriffs ought to be chosen Whence it is evident That the Foâ—… of the Kingdom and the Commanders of those Forces were anciently and ought to be still not at the King's Command but at the people's and that this most reasonable and just Law obtained in this Kingdom of ours no less than heretofore it did in the Commonwealth of the Romans Concerning which it will not be amiss to hear what Cicera says Philip. 〈◊〉 All the â—egions all the Forces of the Commonwealth wheresoever they are are the people of Rome's nor are those â—egions that deserted the Consul Antonins said to have been Antonin's but the Commonwealths â—egions This very Law of St. Edward together with the rest did William the Conqueror at the desire and instance of the people confirm by Oath and added over and above cap. 56. That all Cities Boroughs Castles should be so watched every night as the Sheriffs the Aldermen and other Magistrates should think meet for the safety of the Kingdom And in the 6th Law Castles Boroughs and Cities were first built for the Defence of the people and therefore ought to be maintained free and entire by all ways and means What then Shall Towns and Places of Strength in times of Peace be guarded against Thieves and Robbers by common Councils of the several Places and shall they not be defended in dangerous times of War against both Domestick and Foreign Hostility by the common Council of the whole Nation If this be not granted there can be no Freedom no Integrity no Reason in the guarding of them nor shall we obtain any of those ends for which the Law it self tells us that Towns and Fortresses were at first founded Indeed our Ancestors were willing to put any thing into the King's power rather than their Arms and the Garisons of their Towns conceiving that to be neither better nor worse than betraying their Liberty to the Fury and Exorbitancy of their Princes Of which there are so very many instances in our Histories and those so generally known that it would be superfluous to mention any of them here But the King owes protection to his Subjects and how can be protect them unless he have Men and Arms at Command But say I he had all this for the good of the Kingdom as has been said not for the destruction of his people and the ruin of the Kingdom Which in King Henry the 3d's time one Leonard a Learned man in those days in an Assembly of Bishops told Rustandus the Pope's Nuncio and the King's Procurator in these words All Churches are the Pope's as all Temporal things are said to be the King 's for Defence and Protection not his in Propriety and Ownership as we say they are his to Deâ—end not to Destroy The aforementioned Law of St. Edward is to the same purpose and what does this import more than a Trust Does this look like Absolute Power Such a kind of Power a Commander of an Army always has that is a Delegated Power and yet both at home and abroad he is never the less able to defend the people that chuse him Our Parliaments would anciently have contended with our Kings about their Liberty and the Laws of St. Edward to very little purpose and ' â—would have been an unequal match betwixt the Kings and them if they had been of opinion that that the Power of the Sword belonged to him alone for how unjust Laws soever their Kings would have imposed upon them their Charter tho never so great would have been a weak Defence against Force But say you What would the Parliament be the better for the Militia since without the King's Assent they cannot raise the least Earthing from the people towards the maintaining it Take you no thought for that For in the first place you go upon a false supposition That Parliaments cannot impose Taxes without the King's Assent upon the people that send them and whose concerns they undertake In the next place you that are so officious an enquirer into other mens matters cannot but have heard That the people of their own accord by bringing in their Plate to be melted down raised a great Sum of Money towards the carrying on of this War against the King Then you mention the largeness of our King's Revenue You mention over and over again Five Hundred and Forty Thousands That these of our Kings that have been eminent for their Bounty and Liberality have used to give Large Boons out of their own Partimony This you were glad to hear 't was by this Charm that those Traytors to their Countrey allured you as Bâ—… the Prophet was enticed of old to curse the people of God and exclaim against the Judicial Dispensations of his Providence You Fool what was that unjust and violent King the better for such abundance of Wealth What are you the better for it Who have been no partaker of any part of it that I can hear of how great hopes soever you may have conceiv'd of being vastly enriched by it but only of a Hundred pieces of Gold in a Purse wrought with beads Take that reward of thine Iniquity Balaam which thou hast loved and enjoy it You go on to play the Fool The setting up of a Standard is a Prerogative that belongs to the King only How so Why because Virgil tells us in his Aeneis That Turnus set up a Standard on the top of the Tower at Laurentum for an Ensign of War And do not you know Grammarian that every General of an Army does the same thing But says Aristotle The King must always be provided of a Military Power that he may be able to defend the Laws and therefore the King must be stronger than the whole body of the people This man makes Consequences just as Oâ—nus does Ropes in Hell which are of no use but to be eaten by Asses For a number of Soldiers given to the King by the people is one thing and the sole power of the Militia is quite another thing the latter Aristotle does not allow that Kings ought to be masters of and that in this very place which you have quoted He ought says he to have so many armed men about him as to make him stronger than any one man than many men got together but he must not be stronger than all the people Polit. lib. 3. cap. 4. Else instead of protecting them it would be in his power to subject both People and Laws to himself For this is the difference betwixt a King and a Tyrant A King by consent of the Senate and People has about him so many Armed men as to enable him to resist Enemies and suppress Seditions A Tyrant against the