case Sixtly I would demand of any Lawyer or Divine What is the true genuine reason that the taking up of offensive armes against or offering violence to the person or life of the King is High Treason in point of Law and Divinitie Is it not onely because and as he is the head and chiefe member of the Kingdome which hath a Common interest in him and because the Kingdome it selfe sustaines a publike prejudice and losse by this War against and violence to his Person Doubtlesse every man must acknowledge this to be the onely reason for if he were not such a publike person the levying War against or murthering of him could be no High Treason at all And this is the reason why the elsewhere cited Statutes of our Realme together with our Historians make levying of Warre deposing or killing the King by private persons High Treason not onely against the King but the REALME and Kingdome to Witnesse the Statutes of 5. R. 2. c 6. 11. R. 2. c. 1. 3. 6. 17 R. 2. c. 8. 21. R. 2. c. 2. 4. 20. 3. H. 5. Parl. 2. c. 6. 28. H. 8. c. 7. 1. Mar. c. 6. 13. Eliz. c. 1. 3. Iaco. 1. 2. 3. 4. and the Act of Pacification this present Parliament declaring those persons of England and Scotland TRAITORS TO EITHER REALME who shall take up Armes against either Realme without common consent of Parliament which Enact The levying of Warre against the Kingdome and Parliament invading of England or Ireland treachery against the Parliament repealing of certaine Acts of Parliament ill Counselling the King coyning false Money and offering violence to the Kings person to take away his Life to be high Treason not onely against the King and his Crowne but THE REALME TO and those who are guilty of such crimes to bee High Traitors and Enemies TO THE REALME as well at to the King Hence Iohn of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster being accused in a Parliament held in 7. R. 2. by a Carmelite Frier of High Treason for practising sodainely to surprise the KING and seize upon his Kingdome the Duke denied it as a thing incredible upon this very ground If I should thus said he affect the Kingdome Js it credible after your murder which God forbid that the Lords of this Kingdome could patiently endure me Domini mei ET PATRIAE PRODITOREM being a Traitor both of my LORD and COUNTREY Hence in the same Parliament of 7. R. 2. John Walsh Esquire Captaine of Cherburg in France was accused by one of Navarre DE PRODITIONE REGIS REGNI Of Treason against the King and Kingdome for delivering up that Castle to the Enemies And in the Parliament of 3. R. 2. Sir John Annesley Knight accused Thomas Ketrington Esquire of Treason against the King and Realme for betraying and selling the Castle of Saint Saviour within the Isse of Constantine in France to the French for a great summe of money when as he neither wanted Victuals nor meanes to defend it both which Accusations being of Treasons beyond the Sea were determined by Battle and Duels fought to decide them Hence the great Favourite Pierce Gaveston Tanquam Legum subversor Hostis Terrae Publicus Publicus Regni Proditor capite truncatus est and the two Spensers after him were in Edward the second his Raigne likewise banished condemned and executed as Traitors to the King and Realme ET REGNI PRODITORES for miscounselling and seducing the King and moving him to make Warre upon his people Hence both the Pierces and the Archbishop of Yorke in their Articles against King Henry the fourth accused him as guilty of High Treason and a Traitor both to the King Realme and Kingdome of England for Deposing and murthering Richard the second And hence the Gunpouder Conspirators were declared adjudged and executed as Traitors both to the KING REALME for attempting to blow up the Parliament House when the King Nobles and Commons were therein assembled If then the King shall become an open enemie to his Kingdome and Subjects to waste or ruine them or shall seeke to betray them to a Forraigne Enemy which hath beene held no lesse then Treason in a King to doe who by the expresse resolution of 28. H. 8. cap. 7. may become a Traitor to the REALME and thereupon forfeit his very right and title to the Crowne it can be no Treason nor Rebellion in Law or Theologie for the Parliament Kingdome Subjects to take up armes against the King and his Forces in such a case when he shal wilfully and maliciously rent himselfe from and set himselfe in direct opposition against his Kingdome and by his owne voluntary actions turne their common interest in him for their good and protection into a publicke engagement against him as a common Enemy who seekes their generall ruine And if Kings may lawfully take up armes against their Subjects as all Royallists plead after they reject their lawfull power and become open Rebels or Traitors because then as to this they cease to be Subjects any longer and so forfeit the benefit of their Royal protection By the self-same reason the bond and stipulation being mutuall Kings being their Subjects Liege Lords by Oath and Duty as well as they their Liege people When Kings turne open professed Foes to their Subjects in an Hostile Warrelike way they presently both in Law and Conscience cease to be their Kings de jure as to this particular and their Subjects alleagiance thereby is as to this discharged and suspended towards them as appeares by the Kings Coronation Oath and the Lords and Prelats conditionall Fealty to King Steven so that they may justly in Law and Conscience resist their unlawfull assaults as enemies for which they must onely censure their owne rash unjust proceedings and breach of Faith to their People not their Peoples just defensive opposition which themselves alone occasioned Seventhly It must of necessity be granted that for any King to levie warre against his Subjects unlesse upon very good grounds of Law and conscience and in case of absolute necessity when there is no other remedy left is directly contrary to his very Oath and duty witnes the Law of King Edward the Confessor cap. 17. and Coronation Oathes of all our Kings forementioned To keepe PEACE and godly agreement INTIRELY ACCORDING TO THEIR POWER to their people Contrary to all the fundamentall Lawes of the Realme and the Prologues of most Statutes intirely to preserve and earnestly to indeavour the peace and welfare of their peoples persons goods estates lawes liberties Contrary to the main tenor of all Sacred Scriptures which have relation unto Kings but more especially to the 1 Kings 12. 21. 23. 24. and 2 Chron. 11. 1. 2. Where when King Rehoboam had gathered a very great army to fight against the ten Tribes which revolted from him for following his young Counsellors advice and denying their just request and crowned Ieroboam for their King
against the king and his ill Councellors yea they who pursued apprehended and imprisoned the king himselfe are as to this particular discharged by the king and whole Parliament from all manner of guilt of punishment or prosecution whatsoever against them Which consideration makes me somewhat confident that this King and the Parliament held in the 25. yeare of his Raigne ch 2. Which declares it high Treason to levie warre against the King in his Realme did never intend it of a necessary defensive warre against a seduced King and his evill Councellors especially by the Votes of both Houses of Parliament who doubtlesse would never passe any Act to make themselves or their Posteritie in succeeding Parliaments Traytors for taking up meere necessary defensive Armes for their owne and the Kingdomes preservation for that had beene diametraâ—ly contrary to this statute made in the very first yeare and Parliament of this King and would have lâ—yd an aspertion of High Treason upon the king himself the Queene his Mother their own Fathers and many of themselves who thus tooke up Armes and made a defensive kinde of warre upon King â—dward the 2 d taking him prisoner but onely to Rebellious insurrections of private persons without any publick authority of Parliament or the whole Kingdome in generall and of meere offensive warres against the King without any just occasion hostilitie or violence on the Kings part necessitating them to take up defensive Armes which I humbly submit to the judgement of those grand Rabbies and Sages of the Law and the Honorable Houses of Parliament who are best able to resolve and are the onely Iudges to determine this point in controversie by the expresse letter and provision of 25. Ed. 3. ch 2. of Treasons In the first yeare of king Richard the 2 d. John Mercer a Scot with a Navie of Spanish Scottish French ships much infested the Marchants and Coasts of England taking many prises without any care taken by the king Lords or Councell to resist them Whereupon Iohn Philpot a rich Merchant of London diligently considering the defect that I say not treachery of the Duke of I ancaster and other Lords who ought to defend the Realme and grieving to see the oppressions of the people did at his proper charge hire a thousand souldiers and set out a fleete to take the said Mercers ships with the goods he had gotten by Pyracie and defend the Realme of England from such incursions who in a short time tooke Mâ—rcer prisoner with 15. Spanish ships and all the Booties he had gained from the English whereat all the people rejoyced exceedingly commending and extolling Philpot for the great love he shewed to his Countrey and casting out some reproachfull words against the Nobles and Kings councell who had the rule of the kingdome and neglected its defence Whereupon the Nobility Earles and Barons of the Realme conscious of this their negligence and envying Philpoâ— for this his Noble praise-worthy action began not onely secretly to lay snares for him but openly to reproach him saying That it was not lawfull for him to doe such things without the advise or councell of the King and Kingdome quasi non licuisset benefacere Regi VELREGNO sine consilio Comitum Baronum Writes Walsingham as if it were not lawfull to doe good to the King or Kingdome without the advise of the Earles and Barrons or Lords of the Privie Councell To whom objecting these things and especially to Hugh Earle of Stafford who was the chiefe Prolocutor and spake most against it Iohn Philpot gave this answere Know for certaine that I have destinated my money ships and men to sea to this end not that I might deprive you of the good name and honour of your Militia or warlike actions and engrosse it to my selfe but pittying the misery of my Nation and Country which now by your sloathfulnesse of a most Noble kingdome and Lady of Nations is devolved into so great misery that it lyeth open to the pillage of every one of the vilest Nations seeing there is none of you who will put your hand to its defence I have exposed me and mine therefore for the Salvation of my proper Nation and frteing of my Country To which the Earle and others had not a word to reply From this memorable history and discourse which I have translated verbatim out of Walsingham I conceive it most evident that in the default of king and Nobles it is lawfull for the Commons and every particular subject without any Commission from the king or his Councell in times of iminent danger to take up Armes and raise Forces by Sea or Land to defend the king and his Native Country against invading enemies as Philpot did without offence or crime Then much more may the Houses of Parliament the representative body of the whole kingdome and all private Subjects by their Command take up necessary defensive Armes against the kings Popish and Malignant Forces to preserve the king Kingdome Parliament People from spoyle and ruine In the 8. yeare of King Richard the 2 d. there arose a great difference betweene the Duke of Lancaster the king his young complices who conspired the Dukes death agreeing sodainely to arrest and arraigne him before Robert Trisilian Chiefe Iustice who boldly promised to passe sentence against him according to the quality of the crimes objected to him Vpon this the Duke having private intelligence of their treachery to provide for his owne safety wisely withdrew himselfe and posted to his Castle at Ponfract storing it with Armes and Victualls Hereupon not onely a private but publicke discord was like to ensue but by the great mediation and paines of Ione the kings mother an accord and peace was made betweene them and this defence of the Duke by fortifying his Castle with Armes against the King and his ill instruments for his owne just preservation held no crime If such a defence then were held just and lawfull in one particular Subject and Peere of the land onely much more must it be so in both Houses of Parliament and the Kingdome in case the Kings Forces invade them In the 10 th yeare of King Richard the second this unconstant king being instigated by Michael de la Pole Robert Vâ—ere Duke of Ireland Alexander Nevill ARchbishop of Yorke Robert Trysilian and other ill Councellors and Traytors to the kingdome endeavoured to seize upon the Duke of Glocester the Earles of Arundell Warwicke Derby Notingham and others who were faithfull to the kingdome and to put them to death having caused them first to be indighted of High Treason at Nottingham Castle and hired many Souldiers to surprise them Hereupon these Lords for their owne just defence raised Forces and met at Harynggye Parke with a numerous Army whereat the King being much perplexed advised what was best for him to do The Archbishop of Yorke and others of his ill Councell advised him to gee forth and give
of them did Or any other of their company or of their ayde or of their adherents or of any of them or touching the Assemblies Ridings Appeales and Pursuites aforesaid * As a thing made to the Honour of God Salvation of the King maintenance of his Crowne and also of the Salvation of all his Realme therefore doubtlesse no Treason Rebellion nor any offence in point of Law and also to Ordaine and Stablish that the said Duke of Glocester Earles of Darby Arundell Warwicke and Marshall nor none of them nor none of such as have beene of their returne or company force ayde or councell or any of them in the things aforesaid nor none other person for any thing aforesaid shall be impeached molested or grieved at the suite of the king nor of the party nor in other manner because of any assembly riding beating levying of Penons or of Banners discomfiture death of a man imprisonment of any person taking leading away or detinue of any horses or of any other beasts taking or carriage of goods harnesse armour cattle and other â—ovable goods breaking of houses or of other possessions or goods assault battery robberies thefts comming or tarrying with force and armes or armed in the Kings presence at the Parliament or Councell or else where Raysing of people or exciting the people to rise forcibly against the peace by letters commissions or any other deeds or of any other thing that may be furniâ—hed by them or any of them or ought or purposed to have beene done from the beginning of the world touching any of the said matters before the end of this present Parliament by any imagination interpretation or other colour but shall bee quit and discharged for ever except that the King be answered of all the goods and cattels that were to them which be attainted in this present Parliament or to any of them and which goods and things were taken by any person the first day of January last past or after hitherto We considering the matter of the said Petition to be true and the request of the said Commons in this party to be to the honour of God and the profit of us and our Realme of the assent of the Prelates Dukes Earles Barrons and all others of this present Parliament doe garnt the requests of the said Commons in all points after the forme of the said Petition And moreover of the assent aforesayd we will and grant for the greater quietnesse of our said Realme though that the said Duke or Earles appellants or any other of their company retinue force ayde councell or adherents or any of them have taken led away or withholden any of our Iusticers or any other of our ministers in disturbance of execution of the Law of our Realme of England or in other manner or that they have taken any manner of person as Traitors to Us or to our Realme or other person and the same have voluntarily suffered to goe at large or escape beyond the sea from the 14 th day of Novemb. last past till the end of this present Parliament that they nor any of them be for this cause impeached molested nor grieved any manner of way at the suite of us our heires nor none other party but thereof they shall be quit and discharged for ever nor that they nor any of them be in any wise molested grieved nor impeached at the suite of us our heires or other party for any thing done at any time for to attaine to their purpose against the said appealers or any of them or against any other person for this cause nor for any other thing or deed to affirme the same purposes till the end of this present Parliament but thereof shall be acquitted This Act with others made the same Parliament continued inviolable without dispute for 10 yeers space during w ch there were 8. more Parliaments held w ch approved it but in 21 R. 2. the King having violently seised upon the Duke of Glocester the Earles of Warwicke and Arundell and packed a Parliament to his minde by not summoning any Lords thereto but those oâ— his party by causing divers Knights and Burgesses of his own nomination never chosen by the people to be returned in divers places and overawing the rest with a guard or 4000. Cheshire Archers caused these Lords to be illegally attainted of Treason upon fained pretences out of this old grudge and the Acts of this Parliament to be reversed yet not this Act as I conceive which is part of it being specially saved by 21. R. 2. c. 13. But however by the statute of 1 H. 4. c. 3. 4. the Parliament of 21. was wholly repealed reversed revoked voyded undone and anulled for ever with all the Acts circumstances and dependants thereof and this Parliament of 11. R. 2. Enacted to be firmely holden and kept after the purport and effect of the same as a thing made for the great Honour and common profit of the Realme and ch 5. It is ordained and assented that the Lords and other which were forejudged in the Parliament holden the said 21. yeare or by Authority of the same which now be in life and the heires of the Lords and others that be dead shall be wholly restitute and restored to their names all manner of inheritaments and possessions reversions fees reversions offices liberties and franchises as intirely as the said Lords and others which be in life or the Lords and other which be dead ancestors of the heires or the feoffees of the said Lords or other aforesaid or other feoffees to their use were at the time of the judgement given against them the said 21 yeare by entrie without other suite thereof to be made or livery to be had of the same And all the goods and chattels which were the said Lords or the other persons aforesaid so forejudged whereof the king is not answered and be in the hands of the Sheriffes Escheators or other Officers Ministers or any other and concealed by them the king wills and granteth that the same Lords and other which now be in life and the Executors and administrators of them that be dead shall have thereof delivery and restitution and that the Sheriffes Escheators Officers and Ministers so occupying the said goods and chattels by such concealment bee punished for the same concealement So that by the expresse resolution of these two severall Parliaments these Lords and Commons taking up defensive Armes and making war against those wicked Councellours of this King which sought their ruine and endeavoured the destruction of the Realme though they had the kings presence and commissions to countenance all their actions and proceedings of this nature and the Lords wanted the Ordinances of both houses to authorize this their arming and war was solemnely declared and adjudged to be no Treason nor Rebellion at all nor levying of warre against the king within the statute of 25. E. 3. but contrarywise a thing done to
Barbarous Inhumanity for any person not to put to his uttermost strength speedily to close up the mortall wounds of his bleeding dying Native Country but to protract its cure to enlarge encrease its deadly Ulcers Stabs Sores and make a lasting trade of Warre out of a sordid sinfull desire of Gaine of Plunder to raise a private fortune by the Republicks ruines a sinne of which some perchance are guilty is an unparalleld most unnaturall prodigious Impiety It was thought a great dishonour heretofore for men of Honour and Estates not to serve and defend their Country gratis as our own Lawbooks Histories plentifully manifest and shall such Persons now turne sordid Mercenaries stirre neither hand nor foot without their Pay and be more diligent to get their wages than discharge their Service God forbid It is Recorded of the Children of Gad and Reuben after they had recovered their inheritance on this side Jordan that they went all up armed before the Lord over Jordan at their owne free cost untill they had driven out all the enemies in it before them subdued the Land and setled their brethren of the other Tribes peaceably in it And shall not Englishmen of Estates doe the like for their Brethren now in these times of need when money the sinewes of Warre is almost quite shrunke up by reason of former Disbursements and want of Trade We read That the very Heathen Kings of Canaan when they came and fought in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo against the Israelites THEY TOOKE NO GAINE OF MONEY for their paines Such was their Noble-generosity which Deborah registers in her Song for their eternall Glory And we heare of divers Lords and Gentlemen in the Kings Army which serve against their Country gratis yea furnish out sundry Horse and Foote of their proper cost of few or none such there who receive any Pay And shall these be more free generous active in serving fighting against God Religion Lawes Liberties Parliament and their Country than those of like Ranke and quality on the Parliaments party are in warring for them O let not such anignoble unchristian Report be ever once justly told in Gath or published in the streets of Askelon lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoyce lest the sonnes and daughters of the uncircumcised triumph I know there are some Heroicke Worthies in the Parliaments Armies of whom I may truely sing with Deborah My heart is toward the Governours of Israel that offered themselves willingly among the people and who like Zebulon and Nepthali have freely jeoparded their lives unto the death in the high places of the field Blessed be their Endeavours and their Names for ever Honourable I shall now onely wish that others would imitate their laudable examples that so our long-lingring warres may be speedily and happily determined in a blessed pure pious secure honourable lasting Peace They are Tormentors not Chirurgions Executioners not true Souldiers who desire endeavour not speedily to close up and heale their dearest Countries bleeding festring wounds for which I have prepared this Treatise as a Soveraigne Balme to incarne and cicatrize them not ulcerate or inflame them It was the Prophets Patheticke expostulation The harvest is past the Summer is ended and we are not healed Is there no balme in Gilead Is there no Physitian there why then is not the health of the Daughter of my people recovered It may be Englands and Irelands expostulation now The Lord put it into the hearts of our great Physitians the King Parliament and Grandees of both Armies that they may now at last with bleeding melting hearts and spirits speedily poure forth such effectuall healing Balmes into these two dying Kingdomes deadly wounds as may effectually cure and restore them to more perfect health and vigor than they ever formerly enjoyed that so they may lose nothing but their putrid blood their proud dead flesh their filthy sanies and corrupt humours by their unnaturall stabs already received Towards the advancement of which much desired cure if these my undigested rude Collections interrupted with sundry inevitable interloping Distractions which may justly excuse their many defects may adde any contribution or satisfie any seduced or scrupulous Consciences touching this present Warre I shall deeme my labours highly recompensed And so recommending them to Gods blessing and thy charitable acceptation I shall detaine thee with no further Prologue Farewell THE SOVERAIGNE POVVER OF PARLIAMENTS KINGDOMES PROVING I st That the Parliaments present necessary Defensive Warre is Iust and Lawfull both in point of Law and Conscience and no Treason nor Rebellion HAving in the two former Parts of this Discourse dissipated foure chiefe Complaints against the Parliaments proceedings I come now in order in point of time and sequell to the 5 th Grand Objection of the King Royalists and Papists against the Parliament To wit That they have traiterously taken up Armes and levied warre against the King himselfe in his Kingdome and would have taken away his life at Keinton battell which is no lesse than Rebellion and High Treason by the Statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. with other obsolete Acts and by the Common Law Which Obiection though last in time is yet of greatest weight and difficulty now most cryed up and insisted on of all the rest in many of his Majesties late Proclamations Declarations and in Anti-Parliamentary Pamphlets To give a punctuall Answere to this capitall Complaint not out of any desire to foment but cease this most unnaturall bloody warre which threatens utter desolation to us if proceeded in or not determined with a just honourable secure lasting peace now lately rejected by his Majesties party I say First that it is apparent to all the world who are not willfully or maliciously blinded That this Majesty first began this warre not onely by his endeavors to bring up the Northerne Army to force the Parliament confessed by the flight letters examinations of those who were chiefe Actors in it but by raising sundry forces under colour of a guard before the Parliament levied any Secondly that the Parliament in raising their forces had no intention at all to offer the least violence to his Majesties person Crowne dignity nor to draw any English blood but onely to defend themselves and the Kingdome against his Majesties Malignant invasive plundring Forces to rescue his Majestie out of the hands the power of those ill Councellers and Malignants who withdrew him from his Parliament to bring him backe with honour peace safety to his great Councell their Generall and Army Marching with a Petition to this purpose and to bring those Delinquents to condigne punishment who most contemptuously deserted the Houses contrary to Order Law the Priviledges of Parliament their owne Protestation taken in both Houses sheltring themselves under the power of his Majesties presence and Forces from the justice of the Houses and apprehension of their Officers contrary to
whose Delinquences are so much the more hainous execrable and censurable as their persons honours and places are more eminent should so farre countenance justifie or patronize them onely in the King the Supreame fountaine of Iustice ad tutelam Legis corporum bonorum erectus as Fortescue and Sir Edward Cooke resolve Cujus Potestas Iuris est non Injuriae cum sit author Iuris non debet inde injuriarum nasci occasio unde Iura naseuntur as Bracton and Fleta determine as not to permit the Subjects under paine of Rebellion and high Treason by force of Armes upon expresse command and direction of the whole Kingdome in Parliament so much as to defend their Persons Goods Estates Houses Wives Children Liberties Lives Religion against the open violence of the King himselfe or his Malignant plundring murthering Papists Caveleers When as Kings of all others as Bracton For escue and Mariana prove at large both by Oath and Duty ought to be more observant of and obedient to the Laws of God and their Realmes which are no respectors of Persons then the very meanest of their Subjects That Precept then of Paul Rom. 13. 1. 2. 3. Let every Soule be subject to the higher Powers c. And the Statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. with other obsolete Acts which declare it High Treason to levy Warre against the King in his Realme must needs be intended of and quallified with these subsequent just limitations sutable to their genuine sense and meaning to wit That as long and so farre foorth as Kings justly and uprightly doe execute their just Royall power conferred on them by God and their people according to the Law of God and their Realmes to the Protection encouragement and praise of all their good Subjects and the deserved punishment onely of Malefactors they must and ought to be cheerefully obeyed and quietly submitted to as Gods owne Ministers without the least resistance private or publike neither ought any private men upon any private injuries of their owne authority to raise up in Armes against them seeing they are publike Magistrates in whom all the Kingdome have an interest without the generall assent and authority of the whole State and Kingdome or of both Houses of Parliment which represents it But if Kings degenerate into Tyrants and turne professed enemies to their Kingdomes Parliaments People by making open Warre against them by spoyling murthering imprisoning maiming sacking destroying or putting them out of their Protections without any just or lawfull grounds endeavouring by force of Armes to subvert their Lawes Liberties Religion and expose them as a prey to their mercilesse blood-thirsty Souldiers or bring in Forraigne Forces to conquer them our present case I dare confidently averre it was never the thought nor intention of Paul or the Holy Ghost much lesse of our Nobles Prelats and Commons in Parliament which enacted these Lawes who so oft tooke up Armes aswell offensive as defensive against our Kings in such like cases heretofore to inhibit Subjects Kingdomes Parliaments especially by direct Votes and Ordinances of both Houses under paine of damnation high Treason or Rebellion by defensive Armes to resist Kings themselves or any of their Cavalliers and if this question had beene put to Paul Peter or any of those Parliaments which enacted these objected Lawes Whether they ever meant by these Precepts or Statutes totally to prohibite all Subjects by generall assent in Parliament to take up such defensive Armes or make any forceable resistance against their Kings or their Armies in such cases of extremity and necessity as these under the foresaid penalties I make little question but they would have clearely resolved that it was never so much as within the compasse of their thoughts much lesse their plaine intention to prohibite such a resistance in this or such like cases but onely according to the precedent exposition of their words and that they never imagined to establish in the world any Vnresistable Lawlesse Tyranny or any such spoile or butchery of Kingdomes of Subjects execrable to God and man in all persons all ages which have resisted them even unto blood but rather totally to suppresse them There being scarce any more pregnant Text against the Tyranny the boundlesse Prerogatives the illegall proceedings of Kings and Higher Powers in all the Scripture then that of Romans 13. 1. to 7. if rightly scanned as Pareus and others on it manifest Therefore the Parliaments and peoples present defensive Warre and resistance against their seduced King and his Malignant Popish Cavalliers is no violation of any Law of God of the Realme but a just necessary Warre which they have to the uttermost endeavoured to prevent and no Treason no Rebellion at all within the meaning of any Law or Statute unlesse we should thinke our Parliaments so mad as to declare it high Treason or Rebellion even for the Parliament and Kingdome it selfe so much as to take up Armes for their owne necessary preservation to prevent their inevitable ruine when they are openly assaulted by Royall armies which none can ever presume they would doe being the very high way to their owne and the whole Kingdomes subversion Fiftly admit the King should bring in Forraigne forces French Spanish Danes Dutch or Irish to destroy or Conquer his Subjects Parliament Kingdome as some such forces are already landed and more expected dayly and should join himselfe personally with them in such a service I thinke there is no Divine Lawyer or true hearted Englishman so void of reason or common understanding as to affirme it Treason or Rebellion in point of Law and a matter of Damnation in Conscience or true Divinity for the Parliaments Subjects Kingdome to take up necessary defensive armes for their owne preservation in such a case even against the King himselfe and his army of Aliens but would rather deeme it a just honourable necessary action yea a duty for every English man to venture his life and all his fortunes for the defence of his owne dearest Native Countrey Posterity Liberty Religion and no lesse then a glorious Martyrdome to dye manfully in the Field in such a publicke quarrell the very Heathens generally resolving that Dulce decorum est pro Patria mori Et mortes pro Patria appetitae Non solum gloriosae Rhetoribus sed etiam beatae videri solent In a case of this quallitie Whence that noble Romane Camillus professed to all the Romanes in a publike Oration Patriae deesse quoad vita suppetat alijs turpe Camillo etiam NEFAS EST. And is not there the selfe same equity and reason when the King shall raise an Army of Popish English or Irish Rebels Malignants Delinquents and bring in Forraigners though yet in no great proporation to effect the like designe If armed forceable resistance be no Treason no Rebellion in Law or Conscience in the first it can be no such crime in our present
intending to reduce them to his obedience by force of armes God by his Prophet Shemiah expressely prohibited him and his army to goe up or fight against them and made them all to returne to their owne houses without fighting and to Isay 14. 4. 19. to 22. where God threatens to cast the King of Babilon out of his grave as an abhominable branch as a carcasse trodden under foot marke the reason Because thou hast destroyed thy Land and slaine thy People to cut off from Babylon his name and remembrance and Sonnes and Nephewes as he had cut off his peoples though heathens Yea contrary to that memorable Speech of that noble Roman Valerius Corinus when he was chosen Dictator and went to fight against the Roman conspirators who toke up armes against their Country Fugeris etiam honestius tergumque civi dederis quam pugnaveris contra patriam nunc ad pacificandum bene atque honeste inter primos stabis postulate aequa et ferte quanquam vel iniquis standum est potius quam impias inter nos conseramus manus c. If then a Kings offensive warre upon his Subjects without very just grounds and unevitable occasions be thus utterly sinfull and unlawfull in law and Conscience and most diametrally contrary to the Oath Office trust and duty of a King who by this strange metamorphosis becomes a Wolfe instead of a Shepheard a destroyer in liew of a Protector a publike Enemy in place of a Common friend an unnaturall Tyrant instead of a naturall King it followes inevitably that the Subjects or Kingdomes resistance and defensive warre in such a case both by the law of God of nature of the Realme must be lawfull and just because directly opposite to the only preservative against that warre which is unlawfull and unjust and so no Treason nor Rebellion by any Law of God or man which are illegall and criminall too Eightly It is the received resolution of all Canoniâ—â—s Schoolemen and Civill Lawyers That a defensive warre undertaken onely for necessary defence doth not propâ—ly deserve the nam of warre but onely of Defence That it is no lâ—vying of warre at all which implies an active offenâ—ive not passive defensive raising of forces and so no Treason nor offence within the statute of 25. E. 3. c. 2. as the Parliament the onely proper Iudge of Treasons hath already resolved in point of Law but a faculty onely of defence Cuilibet Omni Iure ipsoque Rationis Ductu Permissa c. permitted to every one By all Law or right and by the very conduct of reason since to propulse violence and iniury is permitted by the very Law of Nations Hence of all the seven sorts of warre which they make they define the last to be A just and Necessary War quod fit se et sua defendendo and that those who dâ—e is such a war caeteris paribus are safe Causa 23. qu. 1. and if they be slaine for defence of the Common-wealth their memory shall live in perpetuall glory And hence they give this Definition of a just Warre Warre is a Lawfull Defence against an imminent or praeceeding offence upon a publike or private cause concluding That if Defence be severed from Warre it is a Sedition not Warre Although the Emperour himselfe denounce it Yea although the whole World combined together Proclaime it For the Emperour a King can no more lawfully hurt another in Warre then he can take away his goods or life without cause Therefore let Commentatoâ—s bâ—awle eternally about Warre yet they shall never justifie nor prove it lawfull Nisi ex Defensione Legitima but when it proceeds from Lawfull defence all Warres being rash and unjust against those who justly defend themselves This Warre then being undertaken by the Parliament onely for their owne and the Kingdomes necessary defence against the Kings invasive Armies and Cavalliers especially now after the Kings rejection of all Honourable and safe termes of Peace and accommodation tendered to him by the Parliament must needs be just and lawfull and so no Treason nor Rebellion in point of Law or Conscience Since no Law of God nor of the Realme hath given the King any Authority or Commission at all to make this unnaturall Warre upon his Parliament his people to enslave their Soules and Bodies or any inhibition to them not to defend themselves in such a case These generall Considerations thus premised wherein Law and Conscience walke hand in hand I shall in the next place lay downe such particular grounds for the justification of this Warre which are meerely Legall extracted out of the bowels of our knowne Lawes which no professors of them can contradict First it is unquestionable that by the Common and Statute Law of the Land the King himselfe who cannot lawfully proclaime Warre against a Forraigne Enemy much lesse against his people without his Parliaments previous assent as I have elsewhere proved cannot by his absolute Soveraigne Prerogative either by verball Commands or Commissions under the great Seale of England derive any lawfull or just Authority to any Generall Captaine Cavalliers or person whatsoever without Legall Triall and Conviction to seize the Goods or Chattels of any his Subjects much lesse forcecibly to Rob Spoile Plunder Wound Beat Kill Imprison or make open War upon them without a most just and in vitable occasion and that after open kostilitij denounced against them And if any by vertue of such illegal Commissions or Mandats Assault Plunder Spoile Rob Beat Wound Slay Imprison the Goods Chattels Houses Persons of any Subject not lawfully convicted They may and ought to be proceeded against resisted apprehended indicted condemned for it notwithstanding such Commissions as Trespassers Theeves Burglarers Felons Murderers both by Statute and Common Law As is clearely enacted and resolved by Magna Charta cap. 29. 15. E. 3. Stat. 1. cap. 1. 2. 3. 42. E. 3. cap. 1. 3. 28. E. 1. Artic. super Chartas cap. 2. 4 E. 3. c. 4. 5. E. 3. cap. 2. 24. E. 3. cap. 1. 2 R. 2 cap. 7. 5 R. 2 ca 5. 1. H. 5. cap. 6. 11. R. 2. cap. 1. to 6. 24 H. 8. cap. 5. 21. Jacob. c. 3. Against Monopolies The Petition of Right 3. Caroli 2. E. 3. c. 8. 14. E. 3. ca. 14. 18. E. 3. Stat. 3. 20. E. 3. cap. 1. 2. 3. 1. R 2. cap. 2. And generally all Satutes against Purveyers 42. Ass Pl. 5. 12. Brooke Commissions 15. 16. Fortesoue c p. 8. 9. 10. 13. 14. 26. 1. E. 3. 2. 2. H. 4. 24. Br. Faux Jmprisonment 30. 28. 22. E. 4 45. a Tr. 16. H. 6. Monstrans de Faits 182 Stamford lib. 1. fol. 13. a. 37. a. The Conference at the Committies of both Houses 3 o. Aprilis 4 o. Caroli concerning the Right and Priviledge of the Subject newly Printed Cooke lib. 5. fol. 50. 51. lib. 7. fol. 36. 37. lib. 8. fol. 125. to 129. Iudge Crooks and Huttons Arguments against Shipmoney with divers
execute them as common enemies to the kingdomes peace and welfare even by the knowne Common Law and Statutes of the Realme and seife Delinquents notwithstanding any royall Commission or personal commands they may or can produce Fourthly it is most certaine that every Subject by the very Common Law of the Realm yea Law of Nature as he is a member of the State and Church of England is bound both in duty and conscience when there is necessary occasion to Array and Arme himselfe to resist the invasions and assaults of open enemies of the Realme especially of Forraigners as is cleare by infinite * Presidents cited by the Kings owne Councell and recited by Judge Crooke in his Argument concerning Ship-money in both the Houses two Remonstrances and Declarations against the Commission of Array and the Answer of the first of them in the Kings name all newly Printed to which I shall referre the Reader for fuller Satisfaction and by the expresse statutes of 1 E. 3. c. 5. 25. E. 3. c. 8. and 4. H. 4. c. 13. The reason is from the Originall compact and mutuall stipulation of every member of any Republicke State or Society of men for mutuall defence one of another upon all occasions of invasion made at their first association and incorporation into a Republike state kingdome Nation of which we have a pregnant example Iudg. 20. 1. to 48. If then the King himselfe shall introduce forraigne Forces and enemies into his Realme to levie war against it or shall himself become an open enemie to it the Subjects are obleiged by the self-same reason law equity especially upon the Parliaments command to Arm themselves to defend their Native Country Kingdome against these forraigne and domesticke Forces and the King himselfe if he joyne with them as farre forth as they are bound to doe it upon the Kings own Writ and Commission in case he joyned with the Parliament and Kingdome against them the necessary defence and preservation of the Kingdome and themselves and of the King onely so farre forth as he shewes himselfe a King and Patron not an enemie of his Kingdome and Subjects being the sole ground of their engagement in such defensive warres according to this notable resolution of Cicero Omnium Societatum nulla est gratior nulla carior quà m ea quae cum Republica est unicuique nostrum Cari sunt pareâ—tes cariliberi propinqui familiares SED OMNES OMNIVM CARITATES PATRIA VNA COMPLEXA EST pro qua quis bonus dubit tâ—mortem oppetere si ei sit prosuturus Qâ—o est detestabilior illorum immanitas qui lacerant omni scelere Patriam nâ—a sunditus delenda occupati sunt fuerunt and seeing kings themselves as well as Subjects are bound to hazard their lives for the preservation of their Kingdomes and peoples safeti and not to endanger the ruine of the Kingdome and people to preserve their owne lives and prerogatives as I have elsewhere manifested it cannot be denyed but that every Subject when the King is unjustly divided against his Kingdome Parliament and People is mere obleiged to joyne with the kingdome Parliament and his Native dearest Countrey who are most considerable against the King than with the king against their and rather in such a case than any other because there is lesse neede of helpe and no such danger of ruine to the whole Realme and Nation when the King joynes with them against forraigne invading enemies as there is when the king himselfe becomes an open intestine Foe unto them against his Oath and Daty and the Peoples safety being the Supremest Law the Houses of Parliament the most Soveraigne Authoritie they ought in such unhappie cases of extremitie and division to oversway all Subjects to contribute their best assistance for their necessary just defence even against the king himself and all his Partisans who take up Hostile Armes against them and not to assist them to ruine their owne Country Kingdome Nation as many as now over-rashly do Fifthly I conceive it cleare Law that if the King himselfe or his Courtiers with him shall wrongfully assault any of his Subjects to wound rob or murther them without just cause that the subjects without any guilt of Treason or Rebellion may not onely in their owne defense resist the King and his Courtiers assaults in such a case and hold their hands as Doctor Ferne himselfe accords but likewise close with and disarme them and if the King or his Courtiers receive any blowes wounds in such a case or be casually slaine it is neither Treason nor Murder in the Defendants who had no Treasonable nor murtherous intention at all in them but onely endeavoured their own just defence attempting nothing at all against the kings lawful Royall authority as is cleare by all Law Cases of man slaughter se defendends and to put this out of question I shall cite but two or three cases of like Nature It hath been very frequent with the Kings of England France and other Princes for triall of their man hood to runne at Iousts and fight at Barriers not onely with forraigners but with their owne valiantest Lâ—rds and Knights of which there are various Examples In these Martiall disports by the very Law of Armâ—s these Subjects have not onely defended themselves against their kings assaults and blowes but retorted lance for lance stroke for stroke and sometimes unborsed disarmed and wounded their Kings our King Henry the eight being like to be slaine by the Earle of Suffolke at a Tilting in the 16. yeare of his reigne and no longer since then the yeare 1559. Henry the 2 d King of France was casually slaine in a loust by the Earle of Mountgommery his Subject whom hee commanded to Iust one bout more with him against his will whose Speare in the counter-blow ran so right into one of the Kings eyes that the shivers of it peirced into his head perished his braine and slew him yet this was Iudged no Treason Fellony nor offence at all in the Earle who had no ill intention If then it hath ever beene reputed lawfull and honourable for Subiects in such militarie exercises upon the challenges of their kings to defend themselves couragiously against their assaults and thus to fight with and encounter them in a martiall manner though there were no necessity for them to answer such a challenge and the casuall wounding or slaying of the King by a Subiect in such a case be neither Treason nor Fellony then much more must it be lawfull by the Law of Armes Nature and the kingdome for the Parliament and subjects in a necessary just unavoydable warre to defend resist repulse the kings and his Cavaleers-personall assaults and returne them blow forblow shot for shot if they will wilfully invade them and if the king or any of his Forces miscarry in this action they must like King Henry the 8 th when endangered by
together to live and dye for justice and to their power to destroy the TRAITORS OF THE REALME Especially the two Spensers after which they raised an Army whereof they made Thomas Earle of Lancaster Generall and meeting at Sherborne they plunder and destroy the Spensers Castles Mannors Houses Friends Servants and marching to Saint Albanes with Ensignes displayed sent Messengers to the King then at London admonishing him not onely to rid his Court but Kingdome of the TRAITORS TO THE REALME the Spensers condemned by the Commons in many Articles to preserve the peace of the Realme and to grant them and all their followers Letteâ—s Pattents of indemnity for what they had formerly done Which the King at first denied but afterwards this Armie marching up to London where they were received by the City he yeelded to it and in the 15 th yeare of his Raigne by a speciall Act of Parliament the said Spensers were disinherited and banished the Realme formis-councelling the king oppressing the people by injustice a vising him to levie warre upon his Subjects making evill Iudges and other Officers to the hurt of the King and Kingdome â—ngâ—ossing the Kings eare and usurping his Royall authority as ENEMIES of the King and OF HIS PEOPLE and by another Act of Parliament it was then provided that no man should be questioned for any felonies or trespasses committed in the prosecution of Hugh â—e de pensers the father and sonne which Act runnes thus Whereas of late many great men of the Realme surmised to Sir Hugh le Despenser the sonne and Father many misdemeanors by them committed against the estate of our Lord the King and of his Crowne and to the disinheritance of the great men and destruction of the people and pursued those misdemeanors and attainder of them by force because they could not be attainted by processe of Law because that the said Sir Hughes had accroached to them the royall power in divers manner the said Grandees having mutually bound themselves by oath in writing without the advise of our Lord the King and after in pursuing the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and adherents the said great men and others riding with banners displaied having in them the Armes of the king and their owne did take and occupie the Chattels Villages Mannors Lands Tenements Goods and likewise take and imprison some of the Kings leige people and others tooke some and slew others and did many other things in destroying the said Hugh and Hugh and their alies and others in England Wales and in the Marches whereof some things may be said Trespasses and others felonies and the said Hugh and Hugh in the Parliament of our Lord the King sommoned at Westminster three weekes after the Nativitie of Saint John Baptist the 15. yeare of his Raigne for the said misdemeanors were fore judged and banished the Realme by a vote of the Peeres of the Land and the foresaid great men in the said Parliament shewed to our Lord the King that the things done in the pursuite of the said Hugh and Hugh by reason of such causes of necessity cannot be legally redressed or punished without causing great trouble or perchance warre in the land which shall be worse and prayed our Lord that of all alliances trespasses and felonies they might be for ever acquitted for the preservation of peace the avoyding of warre and asswaging of angers and rancors and to make unitie in the land and that our Lord the King may more intirely have the hearts and Wills of the great men and of his people to maintaine and defend his Lands and to make warre upon and grieve his enemies It is accorded and agreed in the said Parliament by our Lord the King and by the Prelates Earles Barrons and Commons of the Realme there assembled by command of our Lord the King that none of what estate or condition soever he be for alliance at what time soever made by deed oath writing or in other manner nor for the taking occupying or detainer of Chattels towns Mannors Lands Tenements and good taken imprisoning or ransoming the Kings leige People or of other homicides robberies felonies or other things which may be noted as trespasses or fellonies committed against the peace of the king by the said great men their allies or adherents in the pursuite aforesaid since the first day of March last past till the thursday next after the feast of the assumption of our Ladie to wit the 19. day of August next ensuing be appealed nor challenged taken nor imprisoned nor grieved nor drawne into judgement by the King nor any other at the suite of any other which shall be in the Kings Court or in any place else but that all such trespasses and Felonies shall be discharged by this accord and assent saving alwaies to all men but to the said Hugh and Hugh action and reason to have and recover their Chattels Farmes mannors Lands tenements wards and marriages according to the Lawes and customes used in the Realme without punishment against the king or damages recovered against the party for the time aforesaid For which end they prescribed likewise a Charter of Pardon annexed to this Act according to the purport of it which every one that would might sue out which Charter you may read in old Magna Charta From which Act of Parliament I shall observe these three things First that this their taking up Armes to apprehend the Spensâ—rs as enemies to the King and kingdom and marching with banners displayd was not then reputed high Treason or Rebellion against the King though it were by way of offence not of defence and without any authority of Parliament for there is not one word of Treason or Rebellion in this Act or in the Charter of pardon pursuing it and if it had beene high Treason this Act and Charters on it extending onely to Fellonie and Trespasses not to Treasons and Rebellions would not have pardoned these transcendent Capitall crimes Secondly that the unlawfull outrages robberies and murders committed by the souldiers on the kings leige people and not on the two Spensers the sole delinquents were the occasion of this Act of oblivion and pardon not the Armed pursuing of them when they had gotten above the reach of Law Thirdly that though this were an offensive not defensive warre made without common assent of Parliament and many murthers robberies and misdemeanors committed in the prosecution of it upon the kings leige people who were no Delinquents yet being for the common good to suppresse and banish these ill Councellors enemies Traytors to King and Kingdome the King and Parliament thought it such a publicke service as merited a pardon of these misdemeanors in the carriage of it and acquitted all who were parties to it from all suites and punishments All which considered is a cleare demonstration that they would have resolved our present defensive warre by Authoritie of both Houses accompanied with no such outrages as these for
the apprehension of such as have beene voted Traytors and Delinquents by Parliament and stand out in contempt against its justice for the defence of the Priviledges and Members of Parliament the Liberties and properties of the subject the fundamentall lawes of the Realme the Protestant Religion now indangered by Papists up in Armes in England and Ireland to extirpate it and the removing ill Counsellors from his Majestie to be no high Treason Rebellion or offence at all against the king but a just and lawful Act the very miscarriages wherof in the generall except in such disorderly Souldiers for whom martiall Law hath provided due punishments deserve a publike pardon both from King and Kingdome And to put this out of Question as no fancie of mine owne we have an expresse Act of Parliament resolving the taking up of Armes by the Queene Prince both but subjects and capable of High Treason in such a case as well as others the Nobles and people of the Realme against these two Spensers and other ill Counsellors about this king in the last yeare of his raigne though the King himself were in their Company and taken prisoner by the Forces raised against them for the necessary preservation reliefe and safety of the Queene Prince Nobles Kingdome to be no high Treason nor offence at all namely the statute of 1 E. 3. c. 1. 2. 3 which I shall recite at large Whereas Hugh Spenser the Father and Hugh Spenser the Sonne late at the suite of Thomas then Earle of Lancaster and Leycester and Steward of England by the common assent and vote of the Peers and Commons of the Realme and by the assent of King Edward Father to our Soveraigne Lord the King that now is AS TRAITORS ENEMIES OF THE KING OF THE REALME were Exiled disinherited and banished out of the Realme for ever And afterward the same Hugh by evill Councell which the king had about him without the assent of the Peeres and Commons of the Realme came againe into the Realme and they with other procured the said king to pursue the said Earle of Lancaster and other great men and people of the Realme in which pursuite the said Earle of Lancaster and other great men and people of the Realme were willingly dead and disinherited and some outlawed banished and disinherited and some disinherited and imprisoned and some ransommed and disherited and after such mischiefe the said Hugh and Hugh Master Robert Baldâ—cke and Edmâ—nd Earle of Arundell usurped to them the Royall power so that the king nothing did nor would doe but as the said Hugh and Hugh Robâ—rt and Edmond Earle of Arundell did councell him were it never so great wrong during which usurpation by duresse and force against the Will of the Commons they purchased Lands as well by fines levied in the Court of the said Edward as otherwise and whereas after the death of the said Earle of Lancaster and other great men our Soveraigne Lord the King that now is and Dame Isabel Queene of England his Mother by the Kings will and Common Councell of the Realme went over to France to treate of peace betweene the two Realmes of England and France upon certaine debates then moved The said Hugh and Hugh Robert and Edmond Earle of Arundell continuing in their mischiefe encouraged the king against our Soveraigne Lord the king that now is his sonne and the said Queene his wife and by royall power which they had to them encroached as afore is said procured so much grievance by the assent of the said King Edward to our Soveraigne Lord the King that now is and the Queene his mother being in so great jeopardy of themselves in a strange Country and seeing the Destruction Dammage Oppressions and Distractions which were notoriously done in the Realme of England upon holy Church Prelates Earles Barons and other great men and the Commonalty by the said Hugh and Hugh Robert and Edmond Earle of Arundell by the encroaching of the said royall power to them to take as good Councell therein as they might And seeing they might not remedie the same unlesse they came into England with an Army of men of warre and by the Grace of God with such puissance and with the helpe of great men and Commons of the Realme they have vanquished and destroyed the sayd Hugh and Hugh Robert and Edmond Wherefore our Soveraigne Lord King Edward that now is at his Parliament holden at Westmiuster at the time of his Coronation the morrow after Candlemas in the first yeare of his reigne upon certaine Petitions and requests made unto him in the said Parliament upon such Articles above rehearsed by the common councell of the Prelates Earles Barons and other great men and by the Commonalty of the Realme there being by his Commandment hath provided ordained and stablished in forme following First that no great man or other of what estate dignity or condition he be that came with the said king that now is and with the Queene his mother into the Realme of England and none other dwelling in England who came with the said king that now is and with the Queene In ayde of them to pursue their said enemies in which pursuite the King his Father was taken and put in ward and yet remaineth in ward shall not be molested impeached or grieved in person or goods in the kings Court or other Court for the pursuite of the said king taking and with holding of his body nor pursuite of any other nor taking of their persons goods nor death of any man or any other things perpetrate or committed in the said pursuite from the day the said king and Queene did arme till the day of the Coronation of the same king and it is not the kings minde that such offenders that committed any trespasse or other offence out of the pursuites should goe quit or have advantage of this statute but they shall be at their answere for the same at the Law Item that the repeale of the said Exile which was made by Dures and force be adâ—ulled for evermore and the said Exile made by award of the Peeres and Commons by the kings assent as before is said shall stand in his strength in all points after the tenure of every particular therein contained Item that the Executors of the Testament of all those that were of the same quarrell dead shall have actions and recover the Goods and Chattels of them being of the said quarrell whose executors they be as they of the same quarrell should c. Certainely here was an higher pursuite and levying warre against the King and his evill Councellors then any yet attempted by this Parliament and a warre rather offensive then defensive in which the king himself was both taken and detained Prisoâ—r and then forced to resigne his Crowne to his sonne yet this is here justified as a necessary just and lawfull warre by an Act of Parliament never yet repealed and all that bare Armes
the honour of God the Salvation of the King for if the Kingdome perish or miscarry the king as king must needs perish with it the maintenance of his Crowne supported onely by the maintenance of the kingdomes welfare and the Salvation and common profit of all the Realm and this being one of the first solemne judgements if not the very first given in Parliament after the making of the statute of 25 E. 3. which hath relation to its clause of levying war must certainely be the best exposition of that Law which the Parliament onely ought to interpret as is evident by the statute of 21. R. 2. c. 3. It is ordained and stablished that every man which c. or he that raiseth the people and riseth against the King to make warre within his Realme and of that be duly attainted and judged in the Parliament shall be judged as a Traytor of High Treason against the Crowne and other forecited Acts and if this were no Treason nor Rebellion nor Trespasse in the Barons against the king or kingdome but a warre for the honour of God the salvation of the king the maintenance of his Crowne the safety and common profit of all the Realme much more must our Parliaments present defensive warre against his Majesties ill Councellors Papists Malignants Delinquents and men of desperate fortunes risen up in Armes against the Parliament Lawes Religion Liberties the whole Kingdomes peace and welfare be so too being backed with the very same and farre better greater authority and more publike reasons then their warre was in which the safety of Religion was no great ingredient nor the preservation of a Parliament from a forced dissolution though established and perpetuated by a publike Law King Henry the 4 th taking up Armes against King Richard and causing him to be Articled against and judicially deposed in and by Parliament for his Male-administration It was Enacted by the Statute of 1. Hen 4. cap. 2. That no Lord Spirituall nor Temporall nor other of what estate or condition that he be which came with King Henry into the Realme of England nor none other persons whatsoever they be then dwelling within the same Realme and which came to this King in aide of him to pursue them which were against the Kings good intent and the COMMON PROFIT OF THE REALME in which pursuit Richard late King of England the second after the Conquest was pursued taken and put in Ward and yet remaineth in Ward be impeached grieved nor vexed in person nor in goods in the Kings Court nor in none other Court for the pursuites of the said King taking and with-holding of his body nor for the pursuits of any other taking of persons and cattells or of the death of a man or any other thing done in the said pursuite from the day of the said King that now is arived till the day of the Coronation of Our said Soveraigne Lord Henry And the intent of the King is not that offendors which committed Trespasses or other offences out of the said pursuits without speciall warrant should be ayded nor have any advantage of this Statute but that they be thereof answerable at the Law If those then who in this offensive Warre assisted Henry the 4 th to apprehend and depose this persidious oppressing tyrannicall king seduced by evill Counsellors and his owne innate dis-affection to his naturall people deserved such an immunity of persons and goods from all kinds of penalties because though it tended to this ill kings deposition yet in their intentions it was really for the common profit of the Realme as this Act defines it No doubt this present defensive Warre alone against Papists Delinquents and evill Counsellors who have miserably wasted spoiled sacked many places of the Realme and fired others in a most barbarous maner contrary to the Law of Armes and Nations and labour to subvert Religion Laws Liberties Parliaments and make the Realm a common Prey without any ill intention against his Majesties Person or lawfull Royall Authority deserves a greater immunity and can in no reasonable mans judgement be interpreted any Treason or Rebellion against the king or his Crowne in Law or Conscience In the 33. yeare of king Henry the 6 th a weake Prince wholly guided by the Queene and Duke of Somerset who ruled all things at their wills under whose Government the greatest part of France was lost all things went to ruine both abroad and at home and the Queene much against the Lords and Peoples mindes preferring the Duke of Sommerset to the Captain ship of Calice the Commons and Nobility were greatly offended thereat saying That he had lost Normandy and so would he doâ— Calice Hereupon the Duke of Yorke the Earles of Warwicke and Salisbury with other their adherents raised an Army in the Marches of Wales and Marched with it towards London to suppresse the Duke of Sommerset with his Faction and reforme the Governement The king being credibly informed hereof assembled his Host and marching towards the Duke of Yorke and his Forces was encountred by them at Saint Albanes notwithstanding the kings Proclamation to keepe the Peace where in a set Battell the Duke of Somerset with divers Earles and 800. others were slaine on the kings part by the Duke of Yorke and his companions and the kingâ—â— a manner defeate The Duke after this Victory obtained remembring that he had oftentimes declared and published abroad The onely cause of this War to be THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE PUBLIKE WEALE and TO SET THE REALME IN A MORE COMMODIOVS STATE and BETTER CONDITION Vsing all lenity mercy and bounteousnesse would not once touch or apprehend the body of King Henry whom he might have slaine and utterly destroyed considering that hee had him in his Ward and Governance but with great honour and due reverence conveyed him to London and so to Westminster where a Parliament being summoned and assembled soone after It was therein Enacted That no person should either judge or report any point of untruth of the Duke of Yorke the Earles of Salisbury and Warwicke For comming in Warlike manner against the King at Saint Albanes Considering that their attempt and enterprise Was onely to see the Kings Person in Safeguard and Sure-keeping and to put and Alien from Him the publike Oppressors of the Common wealth by whose misgovernance his life might be in hazard and his Authority hang on a very small Thred After this the Duke and these Earles raised another Army for like purpose and their owne defence in the 37 and 38 yeares of H. 6. for which they were afterwards by a packed Parliament at Coventree by their Enemies procurement Attainted of high Treason and their Lands and Goods confiscated But in the Parliament of 39. H. 6. cap. 1. The said attainder Parliament with all Acts and Statutes therein made were wholly Reversed Repealed annulled as being made â—y the excitation and procurement of seditious ill disposed Persons for the
Pauls Peters objected inhibitions then à fortiori they may be with corporall which are lesse noxious and prevalent he that may with most successeful meanes resist vanquish and overcome his tyrannizing oppressing Soveraigne may likewise doe it by the lesse noxious Armes If Christians may repulse and subdue a Tyrant with their Prayers Teares then why not with their Swords Doth God or the Scripture make any such distinction that we may and must resist them under paine of damnation with these kind of weapons and shall it be no lesse then Treason Rebellion Damnation to resist them with the other what difference is there in point of Allegiance Loyalty Treason Conscience to resist an oppressing tyrannizing Prince and his Forces with a Praier or with a Sword with a Teare or with a Speare Are they not all one in substance By the Statutes of 26 H. 8. c. 13. 1 E. 6. c. 14. 5 E. 6. c. 11. 1 Eliz. c. 6. 13 Eliz. c. 1. words against the King delivered even in Preaching are made and declared to be high Treason as wel as bearing Armes and striking blowes yea the Statute of 1 2 Ph. Ma. c. 9. makes certaine prayers against this persecuting Queen high Treason and by the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 2. it is high Treason for any man to COMPASSE OR IMAGIN the death of the King Queen Prince as wel as to slay or leavy warre against them If then we may by the Objectors confession the practises and examples of the Primitive Christians against Iulian and others fight with our Tongues Prayers Teares Imaginations against our Soveraignes who turne Tyrants and Persecutors and thereby suppresse conquer confound them of which none make scruple though our Statutes make it no lesse then high Treason in some cases then questionlesse they may by the selfe same reason and ground resist them with open force notwithstanding any inhibition in Scripture We may not must not resist any lawful King or Magistrate in the just execution of his office so much as with a repugnant wil thought prayer teare we may yea must resist an oppressing persecuting Tyrant with all these therefore with any other Armes meanes Hezekiah David Moses Abijah Asa resisted their invading enemies and conquered them with their prayers but yet they provided to repulse and vanquish them with other externall Armes The Christians resistance and vanquishing their Emperour Iulian with the one is an infallible argument they might doe it with the other too there being no such distinction in the objected Scriptures that we may fight against and resist them with our prayers teares not armes Fourthly this Father saith not that it was unlawful for the Christians to use any other weapons but teares against Iulian the onely thing in question No such syllable in the Oration but onely that they had no other Armes to resist and conquer him with being utterly destitute and spoyled of all other humane helpe Therefore their want of other Armes and helpe not the unlawfulnesse of using them had they had them was the onely ground they used prayers and teares not armes To argue then those who are destitute of all Armes but prayers and teares must use them onely Ergo those who have other Armes besides prayers and teares may not lawfully use them to resist a Tyrant is but Scholastical Nonsence yet this is the very uttermost this authority yeelds our opposites In one word this Father informes us that this Apostate Emperour Iulian would not make open warre at first upon the Christians because this would altogether crosse the end he aimed at marke the reason Nos enim si vis inferatur acriores obstinatioresque futuros ac tyrannidi obnixum pietatis TUENDAE STUDIUM OBJECTUROS cogitavit Solent enim fortes generosi animi ei QUI VIM AFFERRE PARAT CONTUMACITER OBSISTERE non secus ac flamma quae a vento excitatur quo vehementius perflatur eo vehementius accenditur Which argues that the Christians would have forcibly resisted him had he at first with force invaded them therefore he weakened subdued disarmed them first by policy and then fell to persecute them with force when they had no meanes of resistance left The third authority is that of Bernard Epist 221. to King Lewis of France Quicquid vobis de Regno vestro de animâ coronâ vestrâ facere placeat NOS ECCLESIAE FILII matris injurias contemptum conculcationem omnino dissimulare non possumus Profecto STABIMUSET PUGNABIMVS USQUE AD MORTEM si ita oportuerit pro matre nostrâ ARMIS QUIBUS LICET non scutis gladiis SED PRECIBUS ET FLETIBUS AD DEUM Therefore it is unlawfull for Christians to resist with force of Armes I answer first Bernard was both a Monke and Clergie-man prohibited by Scripture and sundry Canons to fight with military Armes against any person or enemy whatsoever and he utters these words of himselfe as he was a Clergie-man servant and sonne of the Church in the selfesame sence as Saint Ambrose did before It was then onely his Calling not the cause which prohibited him forcibly to resist King Lewis Secondly I answer that this authority is so farre from prohibiting resistance of oppressing Princes endeavouring with force of Armes to subvert Liberties Lawes Religion that it is an unanswerable proofe for it even in our present case King Lewis to whom Bernard writes had then raised a civil warre in his Realme against Theobald and others who desired peace which the King rejecting Bernard doth thus reprehend him in the premisses Verum vos nec verba pacis recipitis nec pacta vestra tenetis nec sanis consiliis acquicscitis Sed nescio quo Dei judicio omnia vobis ita vertitis in perversum ut probra honorem honorem probra ducatis tuta timeatis timexda contemnatis quod olim sancto glorioso Regi David Ioab legitur exprobrasse diligitis eos qui vos oderunt odio habetis qui vos diligere volunt Neque enim qui vos instigant priorem iterare maliciam adversus non merentem quaerunt in hoc honorem vestrum sed suum commodum imò nec suum commodum SED DIABOLI VOLUNTATEM ut Regis quod absit potentiam concepti furoris habeant effectricem quem suis se posse adimplere viribus non confidunt INIMICI CORONAE VESTRAE REGNI MANIFESTISSIMI PERTURBATORES Our present case in regard of the Kings evil seduding Counsellors Then immediately followes the objected clause At quicquid vobis c. After which he gives him this sharpe reproofe Non tacebo quod cum excommunicatis iterare faedus societatem nunc satagis quod in necem hominum combustionem domorum destructionem Ecclesiarum dispersionem pauperum raptoribus predonibus sicut dicitur adhaeretis juxta illud Prophetae si videbas furem currebas cum eo c. quasi non satis per
all presidents in former ages in High affront of the priviledges honour power of the Parliament and Fundamentall knowns Lawe of the Realme Since which time his Majestie having contrary to his former Proclamations and frequent Printed solemne Declarations entertained not onely divers Irish Popâ—sh Rebels but likewise English and Outlandish Papists in his Army and given Commissions to sundry Arch Popish Recusants to Arme themselves and raise Forces against the Parliament and Kingdom now in the field in all the Northerne parts Wales and other places and that under the Popes owne consecrated Banner as many report in defiance of our Protestant Religion designed by the Popish Party both at home and abroad to no lesse then utter extirpation in England as well as in Ireland if not in Scotland too as some of them openly professe the Parliament are hereupon necessitated to augment and recrute their forces as for the precedent ends at first so now more especially for the necessary defence of the Protestant Religion established among us by law against which they and all others who are not wilfully blinded visibly discerne a most apparant desperate conspiracie which though not cleerely perceived but onely justly suspected at first doth now appeare all circumstances and agents considered to be the very Embrio and primitive cause of this deplorable warre against which the Parliament and subjects are now more necessitated and engaged to desend themselves then ever seeing they have by all possible meanes endeavored to prevent this warre at first and since to accommodate it though in vaine upon just reasonable and honorable safe termes for King and Kingdome The sole Question then in this case thus truely stated will be Whether his Majestie having contrary to his Oath Duty the fundamentall Laws of God and the Realme raised an Armie of Malignants Papists Forraigners against his Parliament Kingdome People to make an Offensive warre upon them to murther rob spoyle deprive them of their peace liberties properties estates to impose unlawfull taxes by force upon them protect Delinquents and evill Councellors against the Parliaments Iustice and violently to undermine our established Protestant Religion the Common-wealth of England legally assembled in Parliament and all Subjects in such cases by Command and direction from both Houses of Parliament may not lawfully and justly without any Treason or Rebellion in point of Law and Conscience take up defensive Armes to preserve the Priviledges of Parliament their Lawes lives liberties estates properties Religion to bring Delinquents and ill Councellours to condigne punishment and rescue his seduced Majestie out of their hands and power though he be personally present with them to assist and countenance them in this unnaturall destructive warre And under correction notwithstanding any thing I ever yet heard or read to the contrary I conceive affirmatively that they may justly do it both in point of Law and Conscience I shall begin with Law because in this unhappie controversie it must direct the conscience First I have already proved in Judgement of Law the Parliament and Kingdome assembled in it to be the Soveraigne power and of greater authority then the King who is but their publike Minister in point of civill Iustice and Generall in matters of warre as the Roman Kings and Emperours were and other forraigne Kings of old and at this day are The Parliament then being the highest power and having principall right and authority to denounce conclude and proclaime warre as I have manifested in the debate of the Militia may not onely lawfully resist but oppugne suppresse all Forces raised against it and the Kingdomes peace or welfare Secondly the principall end of the Kingdomes originall erecting Parliaments and investing them with supreame power at first was to defend not onely with good Lawes and Councell but when absolute necessitie requires as now it doth with open force of Armes the Subjects Liberties Persons Estates Religion Lawes Lives Rights from the encroachments and violence of their Kings and to keepe Kings within due bounds of Law and Iustice the end of instituting the Senate and Ephori among the Lacaedemonians the Senate and Dictators among the Romans the Forum Suprarbiense and Justitia Aragoniae among the Aragonians of Parliaments Dietts and Assemblies of the estates in other forraigne Kingdomes and in Scotland as I shall prove at large in its proper place This is cleare by the proceedings of all our Parliaments in former ages Especially in King Iohns Henry the third Edward the 1. 2. 3. and Richard the seconds Raignes by the latter Parliaments in King Iames his raigne yea of 3. Caroli the last dissolved Parliament and this now sitting whose principall care and imployment hath beene to vindicate the Subjects Liberties properties lawes and Religion from all illegall encroachments on them by the Crown and its ill Instruments by the forecited resolutions of Bracton Fleta the Myrror of Iustices Vowell Holinshed the Councell of Basill and others that the Parliament ought to restraine and bridle the king when he casts off the bridle of the Law and invades the Subjects Liberties especially with open force of Armes in an Hostile manner and by the constant practise of our Ancestors and the Barons Warres in maintenance of Magna Charta with other good Lawes and Priviledges confirmed by Parliament If then the Parliament be instrusted by the Kingdome with this Superlative power thus to protect the Subjects Liberties properties Lawes persons Religion c. against the kings invasions on them by policie or violence they should both betray their trust yea the whole kingdome too if they should not with open Force of Armes when Policy Councell and Petitions will not doe it defend their owne and the Subjects Liberties persons priviledges c. against his Majesties offensive Armies which invade them intending to make the whole kingdome a present booty to their insaciable rapine and a future vassall to his Majesties absolute arbitrary power by way of conquest I reade in Bodin that the Roman Senate being no way able to restraine Caesar tooke their refuge to that ancient Decree of the Senate which was commonly made but in dangerous times of the Common-wealâ— Videant Consules caeteri Magistratus ne quid detrimenti capiat Respublica Let the Consulls and other Majestrates fore see that the Common-weale take no harme With which decree of the Senate the Consulls being armed sodainely raised their power commanding Pompey to take up Armes and raise an Army against Caesar to oppose his violent proceedings by force who after his conquest of Pompey refusing to rise up to the Consulls Pretors and whole Senate out of his pride through his ill Councellors advise and talking with them as if they had beene but private men he so farre offended both the Senate and people that to free the Republicke from his Tyranny and preserve their hereditary Liberties they conspired his death and soone after murthered him in the Senate-house where they gave him
no lesse than 23. wounds And Hieronimus Blanca assures us that the Suprarbiense Forum Iustitia Aragoniae or States of Aragâ—n erected to withstand the tyrannie and encroachments of their kings may by the Laws of their Realme assemble together and RESIST THEIR KING WITH FORCE OF ARMES as oft as there shall bee neede to repulse his or his Officers violence against the Lawes For when they erected this Court they said It would be little worth to have good Lawes enacted and a middle Court of Iustice betweene the King and people appointed if it might not be lawfull to take up Armes for their Defence when it was needfull being agreeable to the very Law of nature and reason Because then it will not be sufficient to fight with Counsell For if this were not so and the State and Subjects in such cases might not lawfully take up armes all things had long ere this been in the power of Kings Therefore no doubt our Parliament and State as well as others may by the very Law of Nature and fundamentall institution of Parliaments now justly take up Defensive armes to preserve their Liberties Lawes Lives Estates Religion from vassallage and ruine Thirdly Our owne Parliaments Prelates Nobles and Commons in all ages especially in times of Popery as well in Parliament as out have by open force of armes resisted suppressed the oppressions rapines vnjust violence and armies of their Princes raised against them Yea incountred their Kings in open Battells taken their persons Prisoners and sometimes expelled nay deposed them from their Royall authority when they became incorrigible open professed enemies to their kingdomes their Subjects seeking the ruine slavery and desolation of those whom by Office Duty Oath and common Iustice they were bound inviolably to protect in Liberty and peace as the premised Histories of Archigallo Emerian Vortigern Segebert Osred Ethelred Bernard Edwin Ceolwulfe King John Henry the 3 d. Edward 1. and 2. Richard the 2 Henry the 6 th our British Saxon English Kings and other examples common in our owne Annalls plentifully manifest Neither are their examples singular but all Kingdomes generally throughout the world in all ages have done the like when their Kings degenerated into Tyrants of which there are infinite precedens in History which actions all ages all Kingdomes have alwaies reputed lawfull both in point of Policy Law Religion as warranted by the very Lawes of Nature Reason State Nations God which instruct not onely particular persons but whole Cities and Kingdomes for their owne necessary defence preservation the supportation of humane Societie and Libertie to protect themselves against all unlawfull violence and Trranny even of their Kings themselves or their Ministers to whom neither the Lawes of God Nature Man nor any civill Nation ever yet gave the least authority to Murther Spoile Oppresse enslave their Subjects or deprive them of their lawfull Liberties or Estates which resistance were it unlawfull or unjust as many ignorant Royallists and Parasites now teach some few oppressing tyrannizing wilfull Princes might without the least resistance ruine murther enslave the whole world of men overthrow all setled formes of civill government extirpate Christian Religion and destroy all humane Society at their pleasures all which had beene effected yea all States and Kingdomes totally subverted long agoe by ambitious Tyrannizing lawlesse Princes had not this Lawfull Naturall Hereditary power of resisting and opposing their illegall violence inherent in their Parliaments States Kingdomes restrained and suppressed their exorbitances of this kinde Now that this necessary Defensive opposition and resistance against open Regall Hostile violence which hath beene ever held lawfull and frequently practised in all Kingdomes all ages heretofore as just and necessary should become sodenly unlawfull to our Parliament and Kingdome onely at this instant seemes very unreasonable unto me Fouthly It is the expresse resolution of Aristotle Xenophon Polibius Pope Elutherius in his Epistle to our first Christian King Lucius King Edward the Confessor in his established Lawes c. 17. the Councell of Paris Anno 829. and Isiodor cited by it Iohn Bodin Iohn Mariana and generally of all forraigne Divines and Polititians Pagan or Christian yea of Bracton Fleta Fortescue and King Iames himselfe that a King governing in a setled Kingdome ceaseth to be a King and degenerates into a Tyrant so soone as hee leaves to rule by his Lawes much more when he begins to invade his Subjects Persons Rights Liberties to set up an Abitrary power impose unlawfull Taxes raise Forces and make Warre upon his Subjects whom he should Protect and rule in peace to pillage plunder waste and spoile his Kingdome imprison murther and destroy his people in an hostile manner to captivate them to his pleasure the very highest degree of Tyranny condemned and detested by God and all good men The whole State and Kingdome therefore in such cases as these for their owne just necessary preservation may lawfully with force of Armes when no other course can secure them not onely passively but actively resist their Prince in such his violent exorbitant tyrannicall proceedings without resisting any kingly lawfull royall Authority Vested in the Kings person for the kingdomes preservation onely not destruction because in and as to these illegall oppressions tyrannicall actions not warranted but prohibited by the Lawes of God and the Realme to whom he is accountable and by whom he is justly censurable for them he is no lawfull King nor Majestrate but an unjust oppressing Tyrant and a meere private man who as to these proceedings hath quite denuded himselfe of his just Regall authority So that all those wholsome Lawes made by the whole State in Parliament for the necessary preservation and defence of their Kings Royall Person and lawfull Soveraigne power the suppression of all Insurrections Treasons Conspiracies and open Warres against them whiles they governe their people justly according to Law as all good Princes are obliged to doe by oath and duty or the open violent resisting of their Lawfull authority and Commands to which all Subjects both in point of Law and Conscience ought cheerfully and readily to Submit will yeeld no publike Countenance Encouragement or Protection at all to Kings in their irregall tyrannicall oppressions or violent courses especially when they turne professed publike enemies to their people proclaime open Warre against them invade their Lawes Liberties Goods Houses Persons and exercise all acts of Hostilitie against them as fatre forth as the most barbarous Forraigne Enemies would doe It being against all common sence and reason to conceive that our Parliaments Lawes which strictly inhibit and punish the very smallest violations of the publike peace with all kinds of Oppressions Robberies Trespasses Batteries Assaults Bloodsheds Fraies Murthers Routs Riots Insurrections Burglaries Rapes Plunderings Force-able Entries Invasions of the Subjects Liberties or Properties in all other persons and greatest publike Officers whatsoever
other Law-Bookes Therefore the Cavalliers can no waies justifie nor excuse their Wounding Murthering Imprisoning Assaulting Robbing Pillaging and spoiling of his Majesties people and Subjects and making Warre upon them by vertue of any Warrant or Commission from the King but may justly and legally be apprehended resisted and proceeded against as Murtherers Rebels Robbers Felons notwithstanding any pretended Royall Authority to countenance their execrable unnaturall proceedings Secondly It is irrefragable that the Subjects in defence of their own Persons Houses Goods Wives Families against such as violently assault them by open force of Armes to wound slay beate imprison robbe or plunder them though by the Kings own illegall Commission may not onely lawfully arme themselves and fortifie their houses their Castles in Iudgement of Law against them but refist apprehend disarme beat wound repulse kill them in their just necessary defence not onely without guilt of Treason or Rebellion but of Tresspas or the very least offence And Servants in such Cases may lawfully justifie not onely the beating but killing of such persons who assault their Masters persons goods or houses as is expresly resolved by the Statute of 21. E. 1. De malefactoribus in Parcis By 24. H. 8. cap. 5. Fitzherbert Corone 192. 194. 246. 258. 261. 330. 21. H. 7 39. Trespas 246. Stamford lib. 1. cap. 5. 6. 7. 22. Ass 46. 11. H. 6. 16. a. 14. H. 6. 24. b. 35. H. 6. 51. a. 9. E. 4. 48. b. 12. E. 4. 6. a. 12. H. 8. 2. b. Brooke Coron 63. Trispas 217. Therefore they may justly defend themselves resist oppose apprehend and kill his Majesties Cavalliers notwithstanding any Commissions and make a defensive Warre against them when as they assault their persons houses goods or habitations without any Treason Rebellion or Crime all against the King or Law Thirdly It is past dispute That the Sheriffes Iustices of Peace Mayors Constables and all other Officers of the Realme may and ought by our Lawes and Statutes to raise the power of the Counties and places where they live and command all persons to arme themselves to assist them upon their Command when they see just cause which commands they are all bound to obey under paine of imprisonment and fines for their contemptuous disobediene herein to suppresse and withstand all publicke breaches of the Peace Riots Routs Robberies Fraies Tumults Forcible Entries and to apprehend disarme imprison and bring to condigne punishment all Peace-breakers Riotors Trespassers Robbers Plunderers Quarrellers Murtherers and Forces met together to doe any unlawfull-Hostile act though by the Kings owne precept and in case they make resistance of their power they may lawfully kill and slay them without crime or guilt if they cannot otherwise suppresse or apprehend them yea the Sheriffes and all other Officers may lawfully raise and arme the power of the County to apprehend Delinquents by lawfull Warrants from the Parliament or Processe out of other inferiour Courts of Iustice when they contemptuously stand out against their Iustice and will not render themselves to a Legall triall in which service all are bound by Law to assist these Officers who may lawfully slay such contemptuous Offenders in case they cannot otherwise apprehend them All which is Enacted and Resolved by 19. E. 3. cap. 38. 3. Ed. 1. cap. 5. 2. R. 2. cap. 6. 5. R. 2. cap. 5. 6. 7. R 2. cap. 6. 17. R. 2. cap. 8. 13. H. 4. cap 7. 1. H. 5. cap. 6. 2. H. 5. cap. 6. 8. 19. H. 7. cap. 13. 3. E. 6. cap. 5. 1. Mar. cap. 12. 31. H. 6. cap. 2. 19. E. 2. Fitz Execution 247. 8. H. 4. 19. a 22. Ass 55. 3. H. 7. fol. 1. 10. 5. H. 7. fol. 4. Register fâ— 59. 60. 61. Fitz. Coron 261. 288. 289. 328. 346. Stamford lib. 1. cap. 5. 6. Cooke lib. 5. fol. 92. 9. 3. with sundry other Bookes and Acts of Parliament and Walsingham Hist Angliae pag. 283. 284. Yea the Statute of 13. Ed. 1. cap. 38. recites That such resistance of Processe out of any the Kings Courts much more then out of the Highest Court of Parliament redounds much to the dishonour of the King and his Crowne and that such resisters shall be imprisoned and fined because they are desturbers of the Kings Peace and of his Realme And the expired Statute of 31. H. 6. cap. 2. Enacted That if any Duke Marquesse Earle Viscount or Baron complained of for any great Riots Extortions Oppressioâ—s or any offence by them done against the Peace and Lawes to any of the Kings Liege-people should refuse to obey the Processe of he Kings Court under his Great or-privie Seale to him directed to answer his said offenes either by refusing to receive the said Processe or dispiting it on withdrawing himselfe fâ—r that cause and not appearing after Proclamation made by the Sheriffe in the County at the day prescribed by the Proclamation that then hee should for this his contempt forfeit and lose all his Offices Fees Annuities and other Possessions that he or any man to his use hath of the gift or grant of the King or any of his Progenitors made to him or any of his Ancestors And in case he appeares not upon the second Proclamation on the day-therein to him limited that then he shall lose and forfeit his Estate and place in Parliament and also All the Lands and Tenements whâ—ch he hath or any other to his use for terme of his life and all other persons having no Lands not appearing after Proclamation were to be put out of the Kings Protection by this Act. Such a hemous offence was it then reputed to disobey the Processe of Chancery and other inferiour Courts of Iustice even in the greatest Peeres how much greater crime then is and must it be contemptuously to disobey the Summons Processe and Officers of the Parliament it selfe the supremest Court of Judicature especially in those who are Members of it and stand engaged by their Prostestations trusts and Places in it to maintaine its honour power and priviledges to the uttermost which many of them now exceedingly vilifie and trample under feete and therefore deserve a severer censure then this statute inflicts even such as the Act of 21. R. 2. c. 6. prescribed to those Nobles unjustly fore-judged in that Parliament That their issues males now begotten shall not come to the Parliaments nor to the Councells of the King nor his heires nor be of the Kings Counsell nor of his heires Therefore it is undubitable that the Sherifes Iustices of Peace Majors Constables Leivtenantes Captaines and other Officers in every County through the Realme may by their owne Authority much more by an Ordinance and Act of association of both houses raise all the power of the County all the people by vertue of such commands may lawfully meete together in Armes to suppresse the riots burglaries rapines plunders butcheries spoyling robberies and armed violence of his Majesties Cavaleers and apprehend imprison slay arraigne
tilting blame themselves aloâ—e and have no other just legall remedie but patience it being neither Treason Rebellion nor Murther in the defensive party and most desperate folly and frenzie in any Prince to engage himselfe in such a danger when beneede not doe it I reade of Charles the first of France that he fell sodainely destracted upon a message he recâ—ived from an old poore man as he was marching in the head of his Army and thereupon thinking himselfe bâ—trayâ—d encountred his owne men and slew two or three of them ere they were ware of him woâ—nding others Whereupon they closing with him disâ—rmed and led him away foâ—ceably keeping him close shut up like à Bedlaâ— till he recovered his sensâ—s I thinke no man in his right wits will deeme this their action Treasonable or unlawfull neither did the king or any in that age thus repute it If then a King in an angry franticke passion for Ir. brevius furor est shall take up Armes against his loyall Subjects and assault their persons to murther them and spoyle their goods if they by common consent in Parliament especially shall forcibly resist disarme or restraine his person till his fury be appeased and his judgement rectified by better councells shall this be Treason Rebellion or Disloyaltie God forbid I thinke none but mad men can or will averte it It was a great doubt in Law till the statute of 33. H. 8. c. 20. setled it If a party that had committed any high Treasons when he was of perfect memory after accusation examination and confession thereof became madde or lunaticke whether he should bâ— tried and condemned for it during this distemper And some from that very act and 21. H. 7. 31. 36. Ass 27. 12. H. 3. For faiture 33 and Dower 183. Fitz. Nat. Br. 202. D. Stamford Pleas 16. b. and Cooke l. 4. f. 124. Beverlyes case which resolve â—hat a Lunaticke or Non Compos cannot be guilty of murtheâ— fel nâ—y â—â—petite Treason because having no understanding and knowing not what he doth he can â—ave nâ— follonius intention conceive that a reall mad-man cannot be guilty of high Treason though Sir Edward Cooke in Bevâ—rlies case be of a contrary opinion if he should assault or kill his king And I suppose few will deeme Walter Terrils casuall killing of King William Rufus with the glance of his arrow from a tree shot at a Deere high Treason neither was it then reputed so or he prosecuted as a Traytor for it because he had no malicious intention as most thinke against the King or any thought to hurt him But I conceive it out of question if a king in a distracted furious passion without just cause shall invade his subjects persons in an open hostile manner to destroy them it neither is nor can be Treason ner Rebellion in them if in their owne necessary defence alone they shall either casually wound or slay him contrary to their loyall intentions and those Statutes and Law-bookâ—s which judge it high Treason for any one maliciously and trayterously to imagine compasse or conspire the death of the King will not at all extend to such a case of meere just defence since a conspiracie or imagination to compasse or procure the Kings death can neither be justly imagined nor presumed in those who are but meerely defensive no more then in other common cases of one mans killing another in his owne inevitable defence without any precedent malice in which a Pardon by Law is granted of course however questionlesse it is no Treason nor murther at all to slay any of the kings souldiers and Cavaliers who are no kings in such a defensive warre Sixthly suppose the King should be captivated or violently led away by any forraign or domesticke enemies to him and the kingdome and carried along with them in the field to countenance their warres and invasions upon his loyallest Subjects by illegall warrants or Commissions fraudulently procured or extorted from him If the Parliament and Kingdome in such a case should raise an Army to rescue the King out of their hands and to that end encountring the enemies should casually wound the King whiles they out of loyalty sought onely to rescue him I would demaund of any Lawyer or Divine whether this Act should be deemed Treason Rebellion or Disloyalty in the Parliament or army Or which of the two Armies should in point of Law or Conscience be reputed Rebells or Traytors in this case those that come onely to rescue the King and so fight really for him indeed though against him in shew and wound him in the rescue Or those who in shew onely fought for him that they might still detaine him captive to their wills Doubtlesse there is no Lawyer nor Theologue but would presently resolve in such a case that the Parliaments Army which fought onely to rescue the King were the loyall Subjects and the Malignants army who held him captive with them the onely Rebels and traytors and that the casuall wounding of him proceeding not out of any malicious intention but love and loyalty to redeeme him from captivity were no trespasse nor offence at all being quite besides their thoughts and for a direct president It was the very case of King Henry the third who together with his sonne Prince Edward being taken Prisoner by the Earle of Leycester in the battle of Lewis and the Earle afterwards carrying him about in his Company in nature of a Prisoner to countenance his actions to the great discontent of the Prince the Earle of Glocester and other Nobles hereupon the Prince and they raising an Army encountred the Earle and his Porces in a battle at Eveshaâ— where the King was personally present slew the Earle Routed his Army and rescued the king in this cruell battell the king himselfe being wounded unawares with a Iavelin by those who rescued him was almost slaine and lost much of his blood yet in a Parliament soone after sommoned at Winchester Anno 1266. the Earle and his Army were dis-inherited as Traytors and Rebels but those who rescued them though with danger to his person rewarded as his loyall subjects And is not this the present case A company of malignant ill Councellors Delinquents Prelates Papists have withdrawne his Majestie from his Parliament raised an Army of Papists Forraigners Delinquents and Male-contents to ruin the Parliament Kingdome Religion Lawes Liberties to countenance this their designe they detaine his Majestie with them and engage him all they can on their side the Parliament out of no disloyall intention but onely to rescue his Majesties person out of their hands to apprehend delinquents preserve the Kingdome from spoyle and defend their Priviledges Persons Liberties estates religion from unjust invasions have raised a defensive Army which encountred these Forces at Edgehill where they say the King was present slew the Lord Generall Earle of Lindsey with many others and as they never intended so they
and in such a case God saith Psal 149. 6. 7. 8. 9. Let a two edged sword be in their hands to execute vengeance upon the heathen and punishment upon the people to biâ—de their Kings with chains and their Nobles with fetters of Iron to execute upon them the judgâ—ment written This honour this priviledge in such cases HAVE ALL THE SAINTS Praise ye the Lord. And very good reason is there for it For as Nature it selfe hath instructed Lyons Beares Wolves Boares Stagges Backes and most other beasts not onely to defend themselves against the violence of one another but even of Men their supreame Lords when they assault and hunt them to take away their lives over which God hath given men a lawfull power much more then may men by natures dictate defend their persons lives against the unlawfull violence of their kings or Armies over which God hath given them no power at all but in a legall way of justice for capitall offences when they assault or make warre upon them to destroy them Not to trouble you with Histories of Stagges and other beasts which have killed men that chased them in their owne defence of which there are infinite examples in the Roman and Spanish Histories in those Amphithreatricall sports and spectacles wherein men encountred and fought with Lyons Tygers Beares Buls and other savage Beasts I shall onely recite some few examples even of Kings themselves who have beene slaine and devoured by such beasts as they have chased Madaâ— King of Britain as Polycronicon Fabien Grafton and others record being in his disport of hunting was slain of the wilde beasts he pursued when he had reigned 40. yeares so was his sonne King Memphis slaine and destroyed in hunting in the same manner Merindus King of Brittaine was devoured by a Sea monster which he encountered and Basilius the 35 Emperour of Constantinople hunting a Stag of an extraordinary greatnesse and thinking to cut off his necke with his sword the Stagge ran fiercely at him gored him with his hornes on which he tossed him bruised his entralls whereof he dyed some few dayes after and had beene slaine immediately on the beasts hornes had not one there present drawne his sword and cut off his girdle by which he hung on the hornes to whom he gave a very ill requitall for this loyall service other stories of kings slaâ—ne by beasts in their owne defence occure in story and examples of kings slaine by men in and for their preservation are almost innumerable that of our king Edmond is observable among others who as our Historians write being at a feast at Pulkers Church on Saint Augustines day espied a theese named Leof whom he had formerly banished sitting in the Hall whereupon he leapt over the Table assaulted Leof and plucked him by the haire of the head to the ground who in his owne defence wounded the king to death with a knife hurt many of his servants and at length was himselfe hewen all in peeces But that of our King Richard the 1. is more remarkeable who being shot in the arme with a barbed Arrow by one Peter Basil or Bertram Gurdon as others name him at the siege of Chaluz Castle in Aquitain which rebelled against him the Castle being taken and the king ready to dye of the wound commanded the person that shot him to be brought into his presence of whom he demanded What hurt â—e had done him that provoked him to this mischiefe To whom he boldly replyed Thou hast killed my father and my two Brothers with thine own hand and now wouldest have slain me take what revenge thou wilt I shall willingly endure what ever torture thou canst inflict upon me in respect I have slaine thee who hast done such and so great mischiefe to the world The king hearing this his magnanimous answer released him from his bonds though he slew the rest and not onely forgave him his death but commanded an hundred shillings to be given him If then bruites by the very law of Nature have thus defended themselves against kings who have violently assaulted them even to the casuall death of the assailants Why men by the selfesame Law may not justly defend themselves against the unjust assailing warres of their Princes and Armies without Treason or Rebellion exceeds my shallow understanding to apprehend and I doubt those very persons who now plead most against it onely to accomplish their owne pernicious designes would make no scruple of such a necessary defensive wars and resistances lawfulnesse were the case but really their own and those Papists and Cavalieers who now take up armes against the Parliament the supreamest lawfull power in the Realme and their owne native Country without checke of Conscience would doubtlesse make no bones at all forcibly to resist or fight against the King himselfe should he but really joyne with the Parliaments Army against them and their designes there being never any Souldier or Polititian but those onely who were truely sanctified and religious that made any conscience of fighting against yea murthering of his naturall king not onely in a lawfull defensive warre but in a Trayterous and Rebellious manner too if he might thereby advantage or promote his owne particular interests as is evident by the councell and speech of Davids souldiers and King Saul himselfe 1 Sam. 24. 4. 5. 6. 7. 18. 19. 21. by the words of Abishai to David 1 Sam. 28. 8. 9. 23. 24. by the Councell of Aâ—â—itophell which pleased Absolon and all the Elders of Israel well 2 Sam 17. 1. 2. 3. 4 and the infinite number of Emperours of Kings which have beene trayterously and rebelliously slaine without any just occasion by their own Souldiers and that in a meere offensive not defensive way above halfe the Roman Grecian and German Emperours dying of such assassinations or poysonings very few of them of meere naturall deathes as the Histories of their lives declare Eightly It is in a manner agreed by Historians Polititians and Divines that if a King will desert the defence and Protection of his people in times of warre and danger and neither ayde nor protect them against their enemies according to his Oath and Duty they may in such a case of extremity for their owne necessary defence and preservation desert him who deserteth them and elect another King who can and will protect them from utter ruin Vpon this very ground the Brittons of this Nation after many hundred yeares subjection to the Roman Emperors rejected their yoake and government when they refused and neglected to defend them against the barbarous Picts and others who invaded them when they had oft craved their assistance electing them other Patriots So the Spaniards being deserted by the Roman Emperors and left as a prey to their enemies abandoned their government and elected them Kings of their owne to protect them which they justified to be lawfull for them to doe And in like manner
the Romans and Italians being forsaken of the Emperour Constantine when they were invaded by Aistulfus King of the Lumbards Elected Charles the Great for their Emperour and created a new Empire in the West distinct from that of Constantinople in the East which Bishop Bilson himselfe concludes they might lawfully doe in point of conscience So Childerick being unfit to governe and unable to repulse the enemies of the French which invaded his territories thereupon by the advise of Pope Zachary and of a whole Synod and Parliament in France they deposed Childericke and elected Pipin for their King who was both able and willing to protect them Vpon this very ground the Emperours Charles the third and Wenceslius were deposed as being unable and unfit to defend and governe the Empire and others elected Emperors in their steeds Thus Mahomet the blinde King of Granado was in the yeare 1309. deposed by his owne Brother Nobles and Subjects who were discontented to be governed by a blinde King who could not lead them to the warres in person And Ethodius the 2 d king of Scotland being dull of wit given to avarice and nothing meete to governe the Realme thereupon the Nobles tooke upon them the governmeÌ„t appointing Rulers in every Province so continued them all his reigne leaving him nothing but the bare title of a King not depriving him thereof out of the respect they gave to the family of Fergusius but yet taking away all his regall power And not to multiply cases or examples of this nature Andrew Favine in his Theatre of Honour out of the Chronicle of Lauresheâ—m and Aimonius in his 4 th Booke of the History of France relates a notable resolution given by the Parliament Estates of France in this very point In the yeare 803. Lewes the Debonnaire king of France holding his Parliament in May there came thither from strange Provinces two Brethren kings of Vuilses who with frank free good will submitted themselves to the judgement of the said Parliament to which of them the kingdome should belong The elder of these two brethren was named Meligastus and the younger Celeadraus Now albeit the custome of the said kingdome adjudged the Crowne to the eldest according to the right of Primegeniture allowed and practised by the Law of Nature and of later memory in the person of the last dead King Liubus father to the two contendants yet notwithstanding in regard that the Subjects by universall consent of the kingdome had rejected the elder brother FOR HIS COWARDISE AND EVILL GOVERNMENT cum secundam ritum ejus gentis commissum sibi Regnum parum digne administraret and had given the Crown to the younger brother FOR HIS VALOVR DISCREETE CARRIGE after full hearing of both parties BY SENTENCE of PARLIAMENT the Kingdome was adjudged to the younger Brother statâ—it ut junior frater delatam sibi à Populo suo pot flatem haberet c and thereupon the eldest did him homage with oath of Alleigance in the said Parliament and submitted to this sentence And upon this very ground in some of our ancient British and Saxons Kings Reignes when the right heire to the Crowne was an infant unable to defend his kingdome and people against invading enemies the Crowne hath commonly descended to the Vncle or next heire of full age who was able to protect them and repulse their enemies till the right heire accomplished his compleat age as I have elsewhere manifested If then a Kingdome by generall consent may elect a new King to defend and preserve it in case of invasion and eminent danger of ruine by forraigne enemies when their present King either cannot or will not doe his duty in protecting them from their enemies and exposeth them for a prey to their devastations as these examples and authorities conclude they may though I will not positively determine so Then certainely by equall semblable and greater reason subjects may lawfully take up necessary defensive Armes against their Kings when they shall not onely desert but actually invade and wage warre against them destroy and wast them in an open Hostile manner and handle them as cruelly as the worst of enemies such a wilfull unnaturall Hostile invasion being farre worse than any cowardly or bare desertion of theÌ„ when they are invaded by a forraign enemy And if Kings in case of sottishnesse or Lunacy may be lawfully deposed from their kingdomes by common consent of their Realmes when they are altogether unfit or unable to governe as Bâ—shop Bilson asserts and I have manifested else where then much more may they be lawfully resisted by force without guilt of Treason or Rebellion when they wilfully and maliciously contrary to their oath and duty cast off their Royall governments the protection of their subjects and wage open warre against them to enslave or ruine them If a Father shall violently and unjustly assault his sonne a husband his wife a master his servant a Major or other inferior Officer a Citizen to murther maime or ruine them They may in such a case by the Law of Nature God man resist repulse them in their owne defence without any crime at all as dayly practise experimentally manifests yea they may sweare the peace against them and have a Writ de securitate Pacis in such cases Therefore by the selfesame reason they may resist the King and his Army in like cases there being no more humane nor divine Law against resistance in the one case than in the other Finally it is the resolution of John Bodin and others who deny the lawfulnesse of Subjects taking up Armes against their Soveraigne Prince or offering violence to his person though he become a Tyrant That if a Soveraigne Prince or King by lawfull election or succession turne a Tyrant he may lawfully at his Subjects request be invaded resisted condemned or slaine by a forraigne Prince For as of all Noble acts none is more honourable or glorious then by way of fact to defend the honour goods and lâ—ves of such as are unjustly oppressed by the power of the more mighty especially the gate of Iustice being shut against them thus did Moses seeing his brother the Israelite beaten and wronged by the Egyptian and no meanes to have redresse of his wrongs So it is a most faire and magnificall thing for a Prince to take up Armes to releive a whole Nation and people unjustly oppressed by the cruelty of a Tyrant as did the great Hercu'es who travelling over a great part of the world with wonderfull power and valour destroyed many most horrible monsters that is to say Tyrants and so delivered people for which he was numbred among the gods his posterity for many worlds of yeares after holding most great Kingdomes And other imitators of his vertue as Dio Timoilion Aratus Harmodius Aristogiton with other such honourable Princes bearing Titles of chastisers and correctors of Tyrants And for that onely cause
Tamerlain Emperour of the Tartars denounced warre unto Bajazet King of the Turkes who then besieged Constantinople saying That he was comming to chastise his Tyrannie and to deliver the afflicted people and vanquishing him in battle routed his Army and taking the Tyrant prisoner he kept him in chains in an Iron Cage till he dyed Neither in this case is it materiall that such a vertuous Prince being a stranger proceede against a Tyrant by open force or fiercenesse or else by way of justice True it is that a valient and worthy Prince having the Tyrant in his power shall gaine more honour by bringing him unto his tryall to chastise him as a murtherer a manqueller and a robber rather than to use the Law of Armes against him Wherefore let us resolve on this that it is lawfull for any stranger Prince to kill a Tyrant that is to say a man of all men infamed and notorious for the oppression murder and slaughter of his subjects and people And in this sort our Queene Elizabeth ayded the Low-Countries against the Tyrannie and oppressions of the King of Spaine and the King of Sweden of late yeares the Princes of Germany against the Tyranny and usurpations of the Emperor upon their sollicitation If then it be thus lawfull for Subjects to call in forraigne Princes to releeve them against the Tyrannie and oppressions of their kings as the Barons in King Iohns time prayed in ayde from Philip and Lewis of France against his tyrannie and those Princes in such cases may justly kill depose or judicially condemne these oppressing Kings and put them to death I conceive these whole kingdomes and Parliaments may with farre better reason lesse danger and greater safety to themselvs their Kings and Realmes take up defensive Armes of their owne to repulse their violence For if they may lawfully helpe themselves and vindicate their Liberties from their Kings encroachments by the assistance and Armes of forraigne Princes who have no relation to them nor particular interest in the differences betweene their kings and them which can hardly be effected without subjecting themselves to a forraigne power the death or deposition of the oppressing King much more may they defend and releeve themselves against him by their owne domesticke Forces if they be able by generall consent of the Realme because they have a particular interest and ingagement to defend their owne persons estates liberties which forraigners want and by such domesticke Forces may prevent a forraigne subjection preserve the life of the oppressing Prince and succession of the Crowne in the hereditary line which forraigne Armies most commonly endanger And certainely it is all one in point of Reason State Law Conscience for Subjects to relieve themselves and make a defensive warre against their Soveraigne by forraigne Princes Armes as by their owne and if the first be just and lawfull as all men generally grant without contradiction and Bracton to l. 2. c. 16. I see no colour but the latter must bee just and lawfull too yea then the first rather because lesse dangerous lesse inconvenient to King and Kingdome From Reasons I shall next proceed to punctuall Authorities Not to mention our ancient Brittons taking up of armes by joint consent against their oppressing tyrannizing Kings Aâ—chigallo Emerian and Vortigern whom they both expelled and deposed for their tyranny and mis-government nor our Saxons ray sing defensive Forces against King Sigebert Osfred Ethelred Beornard Coolwulfe and Edwyn who were forcibly expelled and deprived by their Subjects for their bloody cruelties and oppressions which actions the whole Kingdome then and those Historians who recorded them since reputed just and honourable and no Treason nor Rebellion in Law or Conscience being for the Kingdomes necessary preservation and the peoples just defence which Histories I have elsewhere more largely related Nor yet to insist long on the fore-mentioned Barons warre against king Iohn and Henry the 3 d. for regaining establishing preserving Magna Chaâ—ta and other Liberties of the Realme which our Kings had almost utterly deprived them off I shall onely give you some few briefe observations touching these warres to cleare them from those blacke aspersions of Rebellion Treason and the like which some late Historians especially Iohn Speed to flatter those Kings to whom they Dedicated their Histories have cast upon them contrary to the judgement of our ancienter Choniclers and Matthew Paris who generally repute them lawfull and honourable First then consider what opinion the Prelates Barons and Kingdome in generall had of these Warres at first Anno 1414. in a Parliament held at Pauls the 16. yeare of King Iohns raigne Steven Langton Archbishop of Canterbury produced a Charter of King Henry the First whereby he granted the Ancient Liberties of the Kingdome of England which had by his Predecessors beene oppressed with unjust exactions according to the Lawes of King Edward with those emendations which his Father by the counsell of his Barons did ratifie which Charter being read before the Barons they much rejoyced and swore in the presence of the Archbishop that for these Liberties they would if need required spend their blood which being openly done in Parliament they would never have taken such a publike solemne Oath had they deemed a Warre against the King for recovery or defence of these their Liberties unlawfull and no lesse then Treason and Rebellion in point of Law or Conscience After this the Barons assembling at Saint Edmondâ—bury conferred about the said Charter and swore upon the high Altar That if King Iohn refused to confirme and restore unto them those Liberties the Rights of the Kingdome they would make Warre upon him and withdraw themselves from his Allegiance untill he had ratified them all wâ—th his Charter under his great Seale And further agreed after Christmas to Petition him for the same and in the meane time to provide themselves of Horse and Furniture to be ready if the King should start from his Oath made at Winchester at the time of his absolution for confirmation of these Liberties and compell him to satisfie their demand After Christmas they repaire in a Military manner to the King lying in the new Temple urging their desires with great vehemencie the King seeing their resolution and inclination to warre made answer That for the matter they required he would take consideration till after Easter next In the meane time he tooke upon him the Crosse rather through feare then devotion supposing himselfe to bee more safe under that Protection And to shew his desperate malice and wilfulnesse who rather then not to have an absolute domination over his people to doe what he listed would be any thing himselfe under any other that would but support him in his violences he sent an Embassage the most base and impious that ever yet was sent by any free and Christian Prince unto Miramumalim the Moore intituled the great King of Affrica Morocco and Spaine wherein
he offered to render unto him his Kingdome and to hold the same by tribute from him as his Soveraigne Lord to forgoe the Christian Faith as vaine and to receive that of Mahomet imploying Thomas Hardington and Ralph Fitz-Nicholas Knights and Robert of London Clerke Commissioners in this negotiation whose manner of accesse to this great King with the delivery of their Message and King Johns Charter to that effect are at large recited in Mathew Paris who heard the whole relation from Robert one of the Commissioners Miramumalim having heard at large their Message and the Description of the King and Kingdome governed by an annointed and Crowned King knowne of old to be free and ingenuous ad nullius praeterquam Dei spectans dominationem with the nature and disposition of the people so much disdained the basenesse and impiety of the Offerer that fetching a deepe sigh from his heart he answered I have never read nor heard of any King possessing so prosperous a Kingdome subject and obedient to him who would thus willingly ruine his Principality as of free to make it tributary of his owne to make it anothers of happy to make it miserable and to submit himself to anothers pleasure as one conquered without a wound But I have heard and read of many who with effusion and losse of much blood which was laudable have procured liberty to themselves modo autem audio quod Dominus vester miser deses imbellis qui nullo nullior est de libero servus fieri desiderat qui omnium mortalium miserrimus est After which he said That the King was unworthy of his Confederacie and looking on the two Knights with a sterne countenance he commanded them to depart instantly out of his presence and to see his face no more whereupon they departing with shame hee charged Robert the Clerke to informe him truely what manner of person King Iohn was who replied That he was rather a Tyrant then a King rather a Subverter then a Governour a Subverter of his owne Subjects and a Fosterer of Strangers a Lyon to his owne Subjects a Lambe to Aliens and Rebels who by his sloathfulnesse had lost the Dutchy of Normandy and many other Lands and moreover thirsted to lose and destroy the Kingdome of England An unsatiable Extortioner of money an invader and destroyer of the possessions of his naturall people c. When Miramumalim heard this he not onely despised as at first but detested and accursed him and said Why doe the miserable English permit such a one to raigne and domineer over them Truely they are effeminate and flavish To which Robert answered the English are the most patient of all men untill they are offended and damnified beyond measure But now they are angry like a Lion or Elephant when he perceives himselfe hurt or bloody and though late they purpose and endeavour to shake the yoake of the Oppressor from their necks which lie under it Whereupon he reprehended the overmuch patience and fearefulnesse of the English and dismissed these Messengers who returning and relating his Answer to King Iohn he was exceeding sorrowfull and in much bitternesse of Spirit that he was thus contemned and disapointed of his purpose Yet persisting in his pre-conceived wicked designe to ruine his Kingdome and people and hating all the Nobility and Gentry of England with a viperous Venom he sets upon another course and knowing Pope Jnnocent to be the most ambitious proud and covetous of all men who by gifts and promises would be wrought upon to act any wickednesse Thereupon he hastily dispatcheth messengers to him with great summes of Money and a re-assurance of his tributary Subjection which shortly after he confirmed by a new Oath and Charter to procure him to Excommunicate the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Barons whom he had formerly favoured which things he greedily desired that he might wrecke has malice an them by Dis inheriting Imprisoning and Spoiling them being Excommunicated Which things when he had wickedly plotted he more wickedly executed afterwards In the meane time the Barons foreseeing that nothing was to be obtained but by strong hand assemble an Army at Stamford wherein were said to be two thousand Knights besides Esquires and marched from thence towards Oxford where the King expected their comming to answer their demands And being come to Brackley with their Army the King sends the Earle of Pembroke Mariscall and the Archbishop of Canterbury with others to demand of them what were those Lawes and Liberties they required to whom they shewed a Schedule of them which the Commissioners delivered to the King who having heard them read in great indignation asked Why the Barons did not likewise demand the Kingdome and swore he would never grant those Articles whereby himselfe should be made a Servant So harsh a thing is it to a power that is once gotten out into the wide libertie of his will to heare againe of any reducing within his Circle Vpon this answer the Barons resolve to seize the Kings Castles constitute Robert Fitz-walter their Generall entituling him Mariscall of the ARMY of GOD and of HOLY CHVRCH A Title they would never have given their Generall or Army had they deemed this Warre unlawfull in Law or Conscience After which they tooke divers of the Kings Castles and are admitted into London where their number daily increasing they make this Protestation Never to give over the prosecution of their desire till they had constrained the King whom they held perjured to grant them their Rights Which questionlesse they would not have done had they not beleeved this Warre to be just and lawfull King Iohn seeing himselfe in a manner generally forsaken of all his people and Nobles having scarce 7. Knights faithfull to him another strong argument that the people and Kingdome generally apprehended this taking up armes against the King to regaine to preserve their hereditary Rights and Liberties to be lawfull counterfeits the Seales of the Bishops and writes in their Names to all Nations That the English were all Apostates and whosoever would come to invade them hee by the Popes consent would conferre upon them all their Lands and Possossions But this device working no effect in regard they gave no credit to it and found it apparently false the King seeing himselfe deserted of all and that those of the Barons part were innumerable cum tota Angliae Nobilitas in unum collecta quasi sub numero non cadebat writes Mathew Paris another argument of the justice of this cause and warre in their beliefes and consciences at last condescended to grant and confirme their Liberties which he did at Running-Meade in such sort as I have formerly related And though the Pope afterwards for his owne private ends and interest bribed by King Iohn who resigned his Kingdome to him and became his Vassall without his peoples consent which resignation was judged voide excommunicated the Barons withall their assistance Qui Iohaâ—nem illustrum Regim
Anglorum Cruce signatum ET VASALLVM ROMANAE ECCLESIAE an honourable Title indeed for a King pers quuntur molientes ei Regnum auferre which this Pope him selfe did but few yeares before giving his Crown and Kingdome it selfe to King Phillip of France which to save he sordidly resigned up to the Pope quod ad Romanam Ecclesiam dignoscitur pertinere Yet this Excommunication thus procured by bribery proceeding not out of Conscience to preserve the Kings due Rights but selfe-respects to support the Popes usurped interest and Title to the Realme and being a wicked plot of the King more wickedly executed by the Pope who as Matthew Paris writes was AD OMNIA SCELERA pro praemijs datis vel promissis cercus proclivis and the Londoners Barons with divers Prelates then contemning it as pronounced upon false suggestions and especially for this cause that the ordering of temporall affaires belonged not to the Pope Cum Petro Apostolo ejus Successoribus non nisi Ecclesiasticarum dispositio rerum a Domino sit collata potestas And using likewise these memorable Speeches in those blind daies against the Pope and his usurped Supremacy with liberty Vt quid ad nos se extendit Romanorum insatiata cupiditas Quid Episcopis Apostolicis Militiae nostrae Ecce successores Constantini non Petri non imitantur Petrum in meritis vel operibus nec assimulandi sunt in Potestate Prob pudor marcidi ribaldi qui de armis vel literalitate minime norunt jam toti mundo propter excom nunicationes suas volunt dominari ignobiles usurarij Simoniales O quantum dissimules Petro qui sibi Petri usurpant partem c. I conceive this Excommunication rather justifies then disproves the lawfulnesse of this their taking up of armes and the warre insuing it being but for their owne just defence when the King afterwards with fire sword and bloody barbarous Forraigne Forces wasted his Realme in a most inhumane tyrannicall maner Factus de Rege Tyrannus imo in bestialem prorumpens feritatem c. which necessitated the Barons for their own preservation and the Kingdoms devoted by this unnaturall Prince to Vassallage and utter desolation to elect Lewis of France for their King Who together with the Peeres and Estates of France assembled at Lions concerning this Election resolved it to be just and lawfull and the Barons Defensive Warres against and rejection of King Iohn for his Tyranny and oppressions to be just and honourable since they did but flee to these extraordinary remedies and seeke for justice abroad when they were denied it by him that should give it them in as ordinary way at home chosing a King in place of a Tyrant as Matthew Paris with the generall History of France written by Iohn de Serres and Englished by Edward Grimston more largely manifest Secondly the Lawfulnesse and justnesse of the Barons Warres in Defence of Magna Charta with other their Hereditary Rights and Liberties appeares most evidently by the resolution of all those Parliaments summoned by King Henry the 3 d. Edward the 1 0 2. 3. Richard the 2 d. and other our succeeding Kings which have many times even by force of Armes or Menaces and sometimes by faire termes caused these Kings by new Acts of Parliament to ratifie Magnae Charta the Charter of the Forest with other Fundamentall Liberties thus forcibly extorted from King Iohn at first and constrained them to confirme him with their Oathes and solemne publicke Excommunications to be published by the Bishops in their Dioâ—esse twice every yeare oft solemnly vowing and protesting both in and out of Parliament to defend these Lawes and Liberties with their estates armes lives blood which their ancasters had purchased with their blood as I have manifested in the two first parts of this Discourse All which they would no doubt have forborne had they deemed it high Treason or Rebellion in point of Law to take up armes against their Kings in defence or these Lawes and Privileges neither would our Kings and Parliaments in times of Peace have so frequently confirmed these Lawes and Immunities as just and necessary for the peoples welfare had they reputed their former purchases and confirmations by warre and armes no lesse then Treason or Rebellion And if it were neither Treason nor Rebellion in the judgements of our Ancestors and those Parliaments which procured and ratified Magna Charta to take up armes in defence thereof much lesse can it be Treason or Rebellion in the Parliament and Subjects now by Votes by Ordinances of both Houses with force of armes to preserve not only these their hereditarie Charters Lawes Priviledges but their very Lives Estates yea the Privileges and being of Parliaments themselves which are now invaded endangered What opinion the world had of the lawfulnesse of most of the Barons Warres in King Henry the 3 d. his Raigne against this troublesome persidious King in defence of their Lawes Liberties Estates appeares first by the Dialogue betweene Agnellus a Frier minorite one of King Henry his Counsell purposely sent to the Earle Marshall then in armes against the King and this Martiall Earle in the Abbey of Morgan Anno 1233. I will first relate the true state of that Warre and then their Dialogue concerning it King Henry by the ill counsell of Peter Bishop of Winchester removed all his English Officers Counsellors and Servants from his Court and put Poictovines and Forraigners in their places being ruled wholly by them withall he puts the English Garisons out of all his Castles and substitutes Forraigners in them which dayly arived both with Horse and armes in great multitudes and much oppressed the people calling them Traitors so that the power and wealth of the Realme was wholly under their Command The Earle Marshall seeing the Noble and Ignoble thus oppressed and the rights of the Kingdome like utterly to be lost provoked with a zeale of Iustice associating to himselfe other Noble men goes boldly to the King reproves him in the hearing of many For calling in those Poictovines by evill Counsell to the oppression of the Kingdome and of his naturall Subjects and likewise of Lawes and Liberties Humbly beseeching him hastily to correct these excesses which threatned the imminent subversion both of His Crowne and Kingdome which if he refused to doe he and the other Nobles of the Realme would withdraw themselves from his Counsell as long as he harboured those Strangers To which Peter of Winchester replyed That the King might lawfully call in what strangers be would for the Defence of his Kingdome and Crowne and likwise so many and such as might compell his proud and rebellious Subjects to due Obedience Whereupon the Earle Marshall and other Nobles departing discontented from the Court when they could get no other answer promised firmely one to another That for this cause which concerned them all they would manfully fight even to the separation of Soule
reports that Symon after his death grew famous by many miracles which for feare of the King came not in publicke Thus this Historian thus Robert Grosthead the most devout and learned Bishop of that age who most of any opposed the Popes Vsurpations and exactions determine of the justice and lawfulnesse of the Barons Warres Walter Bishop of Worcester concurring in the same opinion with Grosthead The same author Rishanger records that the Earle of Glocester a great stickler in these warres against the king with whom at last he accorded signified to the King by his Letters Patents under his seale that he would never beare Armes against the King his Lord nor against his Sonne Prince Edward NISI DEFENDO but onely in his Defence which the King and Prince accepting of clearely proves that defensive Armes against King or Prince were in that age generally reputed Lawfull by King Prince Prelates Nobles People I may likewise adde to this what I read in Matthew Westminster that Richard Bishop of Chichester the day before the battle of Lewis against King Henry and his sonne who were taken prisoners in it by the Barons and 20000. of their Souldiers slaine absolved all that went to fight against the King their Lord from all their sinnes Such confidence had he of the goodnesse of the cause and justnesse of the warre In one word the oath of association prescribed by the Barons to the King of Romans brother to King Henry the third in the 43. yeare of his Raigne Heare all men that I Richard Earle of Cornewall doe here sweare upon the holy Evangelists that I shall be faithfull and diligent to reforme with you the Kingdome of England hitherto by the councell of wicked persons overmuch disordered and be an effectuall Coâ—djutor TO EXPELL THE REBELLS and disturbers of the same And this Oath I will inviolaby observe under paâ—ne of losing all the lands I have in England So helpe me God Which Oath all the Barrons and their associates tooke by vertue whereof they tooke up armes against the Kings ill Councellors and himselfe when he joined with them sufficiently demonstrates their publicke opinions and judgements of the lawfulnesse the justnesse of their warres and of all other necessarie defensive armes taken up by the Kingdomes generall assent for preservation of its Lawes Liberties and suppression of those Rebels and ill Councellors who fight against or labour to subvert them by their policies In the third yeare of King Edward the 2 d this king revoking his great Mynion Piers Gaveston newly banished by the Parliament into Ireland and admitting him into as great favour as before contrary to his oath and promise the Barrons hereupon by common consent sent the King word that he should banish Piers from his company according to his agreement or else they would certainâ—ly rise up against him as a perjured person Vpon which the King much terrified suffers Piers to abjure the Realme who returning againe soone after to the Court at Yorke where the king entertained him the Lords spirituall and temporall to preserve he liberties of the Church and Realme sent an honourable message to the King to deliver Piers into their hands or banish him for the preservation of the peace Treasure and weale of the Kingdome this wilfull King denies their just request whereupon the Lords thus contemned and deluded raised an army and march with all speede towards New-Castle NOT TO OFFER INIVRIE OR MOLESTATION TO THE KING but to apprehend Peirs and judge him according to Law upon this the King fleeth together with Peirs to Tinemouth and from thence to Scarborough Castle where Piers is forced to render himselfe to the Barrons who at Warwicke Castle without any legall triall by meere martiall Law beheaded him as a subvertor of the Lawes and an OPEN TRAITOR TO THE KINGDOME For which facts this King afterwards reprehending and accusing the Lords in Parliament in the 7 th yeare of his Raigne they stoutly answered THAT THEY HAD NOT OFFENDED IN ANY ONE POINT BVT DESERVED HIS ROYAL FAVOVR for they HAD NOT GATHERED FORCE AGAINST HIM though he were in Piers his company assisted countenanced and fled with him BVT AGAINST THE PVBLICKE ENEMIE OF THE REALME Whereupon there were two acts of oblivion passed by the King Lords and Commons assembled in that Parliament Printed in the 2 d Part of old Magna Charta The first that no person on the Kings part should be questioned molested impeached imprisoned and brought to judgement for causing Pierce to returne from Exile or harboring councelling or ayding hiâ—â—ere after his returne The second on the Barons part in these words It is provided by the King and by the Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Earles Barâ—s and Commons of the Realme assembled according to our Command and unanimously assented and accorded that none of what estate or condition soever he be shall in time to come be appealed or challenged for the apprehending deteining or death of Peirsde Gaveston nor shall for the said death be apprehended nor imprisoned impeached molested nor grieved nor judgement given against him by us nor by others at our suite nor at the suite of any other either in the Kings Court or elsewhere Which act the King by his Writ sent to the Judges of the Kings Bench commanding that this grant and concord shall be firme and stable in all its points and that every of them should be held and kept in perpetuitie to which end he commands them to cause this act to be there inrolled and firmely kept for ever A pregnant evidence that the Barons taking up Armes then against this Traytor and enemie of the Realme in pursuance of the Act and sentence of Parliament for his banishment though the King were in his company and assisted him all he might was then both by King and Parliament adjudged no Treason nor Rebellion at all in point of Law but a just honorable action Wherefore their taking up Armes is not mentioned in this Act of oblivion seeing they all held it just but their putting Piers to death without legall triall which in strictnesse of Law could not be justified Now whether this be not the Parliaments and kingdomes present case in point of Law who tooke up armes principally at first for defence of their owne Priviledges of Parliament and apprehention of delinquents who seducing the king withdrew him from the Parliament and caused him to raise an Army to shelter themselves under its power against the Parliament let every reasonable man determine and if it be so we see this ancient Act of Parliament resolves it to be no high Treason nor Rebellion nor offence against the King but a just lawfull act for the kings the kingdomes honour and safety Not long after this the two Spensers getting into the kings favour and seducing miscouncelling him as much as Gaveston did the Lords and Barrons hereupon in the 14 th and 15 th yeares of his raigne confederated
accomplishment of their owne Rancor and Covetousnesse that they might injoy the Lands Offices Possessions and Goods of the lawfull â—ords and liege People of the King and that they might finally destroy the laid lawfull Lords and Liege People and their Issues and Heires for ever as now the Kings ill Counsellors and hungry Cavalleers seek to destroy the Kings faithfull Liege Lords and People that they may gaine their Lands and Estates witnesse the late intercepted Leâ—ter of Sir Iohn Brooks giving advise to thus purpose to his Majestie and this Assemblâ— was declared to be no lawful Parliament but a devillish Counsell which desired more the destruction then advancement of the Publike weale and the Duke Earles with their assistants were restored and declared to be Faithful and Lawful Lords and Faithful liege People of the Realme of England who alwaies had great and Fathfull Love to the Preferrement and Surety of the Kings Person according to their Duty If then these two Parliaments acquitted these Lords and their companions thus taking up Armes from any the least guilt of Treason and rebellion against the King because they did it onely for the advancement of the publike weale the setting the Realme in a better condition the removing ill Counsellors and publike oppressors of the Realme from about the King and to rescue his person out of their hands then questionlesse by their resolutions our present Parliaments taking up defensive armes upon the selfe-same grounds and other important causes and that by consent of both Houses which they wanted can be reputed no high Treason nor Rebellion against the King in point of Law and no just no rationall Iudge or Lawyer can justly averre the contrary against so many forecited resolutions in Parliament even in printed Acts. The Earle of Richmund afterward King Henry the seventh taking up armes against Richard the third a lawfull King defacto being crowned by Parliament but an Vsurper and bloody â—yrant in Verity to recover his Inheritance and Title to the Crowne and ease the Kingdome of this unnaturall blood-thirsty Oppressor before his fight at Boswell Field used this Oration to his Souldiers pertinent to our purpose If ever God gave victory to men fighting in a just quarrell or if he ever aided such as made warre for the wealth and tuition of their owne naturall and nutritive Countrey or if he ever succoured them which adventured their lives for the reliefe of Innocents suppression of malefactors and apparent Offenders No doubt my Fellowes and Friends but he of his bountifull goodnesse will this day send us triumphant victory and a lucky revenge over our proud Enemies and arrogant adversaries for if you remember and consider the very cause of our just quarrel you shall apparently perceive the same to be true godly and vertuous In the which I doubt not but God will rather ayde us yea and fight for us then see us vanquished and profligate by such as neither feare him nor his Lawes nor yet regard Iustice and honesty Our cause is so just that no enterprise can be of more vertue both by the Laws Divine and Civill c. If this cause be not just and this quarrell godly let God the giver of victory judge and determine c. Let us therefore fight like invincible Gyants and set on our enemies like untimorous Tygers and banish all feare like tamping Lyons March forth like strong and robustious Champions and begin the battaile like hardy Conquerors the Battell is at hand and the Victory approacheth and if wee shamefully recule or cowardly fly we and all our sequele be destroyed and dishonoured for ever This is the day of gaine and this is the time of losse get this dayes victory and be Conquerours and lose this dayes battell and bee villaines And therefore in the name of God and Saint George let every man couragiously advance his standard They did so slew the Tyrannicall Vsurper wonne the Field And in the first Parliament of his Raigne there was this Act of indemnity passed That all and singular persons comming with him from beyond the Seas into the Realme of England taking his party and quarrell in recovering his just Title and Right to the Realme of England shall be utterly discharged quit and unpunishable for ever by way of action or otherwise of or for any murther slaying of men or of taking and disporting of goods or any other trespasses done by them or any of them to any person or persons of this his Realme against his most Royall Person his Banner displayed in the said field and in the day of the said field c. Which battell though it were just and no Treason nor Rebellion in point of Law in those that assiâ—ted King Henry the 7 th against this Vsurper yet because the killing of men and seising their goods in the time of Warre is against the very fundamentall Lawes of the Realme they needed an Act of Parliament to discharge them from suits and prosecutions at the Law for the same the true reason of all the forecited Acts of this nature which make no mention of pardoning any Rebellions or Treasons against the King for they deemed their forementioned taking up of Armes no such offences but onely discharge the Subjects from all suites actions and prosecutions at Law for any killing or slaying of men batteries imprisonments robberies and trespasses in seising of Persons Goods Chattels What our Princes and State have thought of the lawfulnesse of necessary Defensive sive Warres of Subjects against their oppressing Kings and Princes appeares by those aides and succours which our Kings in former ages have sent to the French Flemmings Almaines and others when their Kings and Princes have injuriously made Warres upon them and more especially by the publike ayde and assistance which our Queene Elizabeth and King James by the publike advise and consent of the Realme gave to the Protestants in France Germany Bohemia and the Netherlands against the King of France the Emperour and King of Spaine who oppressed and made Warre upon them to deprive them of their just Liberties and Religion of which more hereafter Certainely had their Defensive Warres against their Soveraigne Princes to preserve their Religion Liberties Priviledges beene deemed Treason Rebellion in point of Law Queene Elizabeth King James and our English State would never have so much dishonoured themselves nor given so ill an example to the world to Patronize Rebells or Traitours or enter into any solemne Leagues and Covenants with them as then they did which have been frequently renued and continued to this present And to descend to our present times our King Charles himself hath not onely in shew at least openly aided the French Protestants at Ree and Rochel against their King who warred on them the Germane Princes against the Emperour the Hollanders and Prince of Orange to whose Sonne hee hath married his elstest Daughter against the Spaniard and entred into a solemne League with them which hee could
not have done in point of Law Iustice Honour Conscience had they beene Rebells or Traytors for standing on their guards and making defensive Warres onely for their owne and their Religions preservation but likewise by two severall publike Acts of Parliament the one in England the other in Scotland declaring the Scots late taking up Armes against him and his evill Counsellors in defence of their Religion Lawes Priviledges to be no Treason nor Rebellion and them to bee his true and loyall Subjects notwithstanding all aspertions cast upon them by the Prelaticall and Popish Party because they had no ill or disloyall intention at all against his Majesties Person Crowne and Dignity but onely a care of their owne preservation and the redresse of thâ—se Enormities Pressures grievances in Church and State which threatned desolation unto both If then their seizing of the Kings Fortes Ammunition Revenues and raising an Army for the foresaid ends hath by his Majesty himselfe and his two Parliaments of England and Scotland beene resolved and declared to be no Treason no Rebellion at all against the King by the very same or better reason all circumstances duely pondered our Parliaments present taking up Armes and making a Defensive Warre for the endes aforesaid neither is nor can be adjudged Treason or Rebellion in point of Law or Iustice In fine the King himself in his Answer to the 19. Propositions of both Houses Iune 3. 1642. Confesseth and calleth God to witnesse That all the Rights of his Crowne are vested in him for his Subjects sake That the Prince may not make use of his high and perpetuall power to the hurt of those for whose good he hath it nor make use of the name of publike Necessity for the gaine of his private Favourites and Followers to the detriment of his people That the House of Commons may impeach those who for their owne ends though countenanced with any surreptitiously gotten Command of the King have violated that Law which he is bound when he knowes it to protect and to protection of which they were bound to advise him at least Not to serve him in the Contrary let the Cavalleers and others consider this and the Lords being trusted with a Iudiciary power are an excellent screene and banke betweene the King and people to assist each against any Incroachments of the other and by just Iudgements to preserve that Law which ought to be the Rule of every one of the three Therefore the power Legally placed in both Houses Being more then sufficient to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny by his Majesties owne Confession it must needs be such a power as may legally inable both Houses when Armes are taken up against them by the King or any other to subvert Lawes Liberties Religion and introduce an Arbitrary government not onely to make Lawes Ordinances and Assessements but likewise to take up Armes to defend and preserve themselves their Lawes Liberties religion and to prevent restraine all forces raysed against them to set up Tyranny else should they want not onely a more then sufficient but even a sâ—fficient necessary power to prevent and restraine the power of Tyranny which being once in armes cannot bee restraned and prevented repulsed with Petitions Declarations Lawes Ordinances or any Paper Bulwarkes and Fortifications or other such probable or possible meanes within the Parliaments power but onely by Armes and Militarie Forces as reason and experience in all Ages manifest From all which pregnant punctuall domesticke Authorities and resolutions of Ancient Moderne and present times I presume I may infallibly conclude That the Parliaments present taking up necessary Defensive Armes is neither Treason nor Rebellion in iudgement of Law but a iust and lawfull Act for the publicke benefit and preservation of King Kingdome Parliament Lawes Liberties Religion and so neither their Generall Souldiers nor any person whatsoever imployed by them in this War or contributing any thing towards its maintenance are or can be Legally indicted prosecuted or in any manner proceeded against as Traitors Rebels Delinquents against the King or Kingdome and that all Proclamations Declarations Indictments or proceedings against them or any of them as Traitors Rebels or Delinquents are utterly unlawfull iniust and ought to be reversed as meere Nullities It would be an infinite tedious labour for me to relate what Civilians and Canonists have written concerning Warre and what Warre is just and lawfull what not In briefe they all generally accord That no Warre may or ought to be undertaken cut of covetousnesse lust ambition cruelty malice desire of hurt revenge or for booty propter praedam enim militare peccatum est Whence Joh Baptist Luke 3. 14. gave this answer to the Souldiers who demanded of him what shall we doe Doe violence to no man neither accuse any man falsly and be content with your wages Ne dum sumptus quaeritur praedo grassetur Which prooves the Warres of our plundring pillaging Cavalleers altogether sinnefull and unjust And that such a Warre onely is just which is waged for the good and necessary defence of the Common-wealth by publike Edict or consent or to regaine some thing which is unjustly detained or taken away and cannot otherwise be acquired or to repell or punish some injury or to curbe the insolency of wicked men or preserve good men from their uniust oppressions which Warres ought onely to be undertaken out of a desire of Peace as they prove out of Augustine Gregory Isidor Hispalensis and others In one word they all accord That a necessary defensive Warre to repulse an Injury and to preserve the State Church Republike Freedomes Lives Chastities Estates Lawes Liberties Religion from unjust violence is and ever hath beene lawfull by the Law of Nature of Nation yea By all Lawes whatsoever and the very dictate of Reason And that aâ—nâ—cessary defensive Warre is not properly a Warre but a meere Defence against an unlawfull Violence And therâ—fore mâ—st of necessitie be acknowledge lawfull because directly opposite to and the onely remedy which Gâ—d and Nature have giuen men against Tâ—rannicall and unjust invasions which are both sâ—â—nâ—full and unlawfull And so can be no Treason no Rebellion no crime at all thouâ—â— our Princes or Parents be the unjust assailâ—nts Of which see more in Hugo Groâ—ius de Iure Belli l. 2. c. 1. I shall close up the Civillians and Câ—noâ—â—â—s Opinions touching the lawfulnesse of a Defensive Warre with the words oâ— Aâ—bericâ—â—â—entilis Professor of Civill Law in the Vniversitie of Oxford in Queene Elizabeths Raigne Who in his learned Booke De Jure Belli Pacis Dedicated to the most illustrious Robert Devoreux Earle of Essex Father to the Parliaments present Lord Generall determines thus Lib. 1. caâ— 13 pag. 92. c. Although I say there be no cause of warre from nature yet there are causes for which we undertake warre by the conduct of nature as is the cause of Defence and when warre is
therefore not to be expected in which expectation there are also both other the foresaid certaine evils and that likewise which is mentioned in the causes of private men least perchance by giving the first stroke we be slaine or lest we yeeld by flying and be oppressed lying downe But not to flye is to repell force all these things are cleare and tried and most apt to warlike tractates What followes hath some doubt when the thing may seeme to come to that passe that we must now run to this profitable defence A just cause of feare is required suspition is not sufficient Now a just feare is defined a feare of a greater evill and such as may deservedly happen unto a constant man But here in this great cause of Kingdomes a feare that no dammage should happen although not very great or if there be an evident cause of feare although the danger be not true but the cause onely of feare just is sufficient but not when a man feares that he ought not c. But concerning prevention there are notable things in Gellius In all things to be taken heed of there is not the same cause neither in the affaires and actions and Offices of humane life or of taking or deferring or revenging or bereaving To a gladiator ready to fight this lot of fight is propounded either to slay if he shall prevaile or to be slaine if he shall give over But the life of man is not circumscribed with such unjust untamed necessities that therefore thou oughtest first to doe the injury which unlesse thou shalt doe thou mayest suffer And Cicero who hath ever enacted this or to whom can it be granted without the greatest perill of all men that he might lawfully slay him of whom he might say he hath beene afraid lest he himselfe might be slaine afterward by him yet rightly notwithstanding the Mitileins against the Athenians If we seeme injurious to any if we have first failed not tarrying till wee might plainely know if they would doe us any hurt he doth not rightly consider for if we had beene of equall power we might safely lay ambushes for them againe and we might delay then he should speake truth but since they have alwayes with them a power of hurting it beseemed us to have this power that we might anticipate a defence Why againe doe we aske for Bartolusses or Baldusses with whose bare names we might rest satisfied and yet doe not more esteeme the defence of a most noble Republick yea of Thucidides a most noble man and the sentence of a most wise man fortified with reason And seeing there may not be one probable cause of feare and generally nothing can be defined concerning it here we shall onely say that it hath alwayes beene very considerable and at this day and hereafter it is to be considered that potent and ambitious Princes may be resisted for they being contented with no bounds will at last sometime or other invade the fortunes of all men Thus the Romans move warre against Philip lest Greece being subdued he should first make warre upon them Thus Lysimachus when Demetrius had gotten the Kingdome fearing least he should provoke him first moved warre for he knew that Demetrius had it from his father alwayes to thinke of promoting the Empire Thus the Lacedemonian Embassadors move the King of Sicily to warre because all the rest of the Graecians being overcome by Persa he might in like manner stirre up ware against the Siculi Men say by helping us thou maist defend thy selfe Thus the Lacaedemonians themselves perswaded by the Acanthii tooke up warre against the Olynthi who by conquering their neighbours every where and proceeding alwayes to further parts they made no end of warres and of encreasing their dominion Thus the Compani for the Fidicini against the Samnites and they say We have fought in word for the Fidicini in deed for our selves when we saw a neighboring people to be set upon by the wicked plundering of the Samnites and when the Fidicini had beene inflamed that fire would hâ—reafter be transferred upon us which also Hermâ—crates a just man of Syracuse doth any of us thinke that a neighbour further off being already overcome the calamity will not come upon him also Thus Perseus thus Metridates did move and call in others against the power of the Romans for neither are occasions of warre wanting to those that aspire to the Empire and now they are hated for their power Which thing Appius somewhere saith to those his Romans and it appeares most true for by ayding their confederates and friends presently they got the Empire of the whole world But to omit these manifold examples which even others have thus noted and which do thus declare to us the Law of Nations which we seeke might not all men most justly withstand the Turke on that side and the Spaniard on this meditating dominion every where and plotting it for indeed the Turke wrongs not many nor yet the Spaniard neither can the one or other doe it but they both doe injury to some and he that doth wrong to one threatens many shall warres themselves be expected we have heard of the Turkes before and we all see it if any one discernes it not of the Spaniards he may heare of P. Jovius that the nature of these are both impotent and greedy of bearing rule and when they have once crept in endeavour alwayes by all meanes to attaine the highest power Therefore we ought to resist and it is better to beware that men encrease not too much in power then to seeke remedy afterward against the mighty While the enemie is little kill him Wickednesse lest Tares grow is to be crushed in the seed Why are not these sayings of Hierome pertinent even here We cannot joyntly resist a common danger a common feare unites even those that are most divided and furthest off and that by the instinct of nature and our Baldus teacheth out of Aristotle This is the reason of Empyres that they may not hurt as he whosoever he was said wel in Dionysius and nothing more true and uttered as it were from an Oracle In the judgement of Bodin It is sufficient to have power to hurt and that which can destroy others dee thou destroy first as aptly here the witty Poet and truly it is very grievous that we may possibly suffer an injury although we doe not suffer it as Plutarch speaketh and Baldus that it is lawfull to use meanes for resistance nor ought it to be in the power of an adversary to hurt us if he would and that we ought to consider that which hurteth and that which can hurt Even the continuing of concord among the elements is this by equall proportion and while in none one is subdued of the other o And this is that which that most wise most
gods have this Law none of us will crosse the desire of him that willeth but wee yeeld alwaies one to another Which being the fictions of very wise men are applyed unto Princes of the earth But even without any circumstance at all the Corinthians speake thus to the Athenians We doe plainely deny that any is forbidden to punish his owne for if thou shalt defend those that have offended even your owne Subjects will defend themselves from you Yet I thinke not Subjects of other men are altogether strangers from that neerensse of nature and union of Society you doe also cut off the unity of mankinde whereby life is sustained as excelently Seneca And if we make not Princes lawlesse tyed to no Lawes nor Conditions It is necessary that there be some to admonish them of their duty and may hold them fast bound which reason I expounded in the second Booke of Embassies Neither will I heere infer any confusion of kingdomes or any inspection of one Prince over another Prince neither doe I suffer those things to bee distinguished which are most firmely glued together by nature I meane that kinred with all among all Neither here otherwise may one Prince have inspection over another Prince but such as may happen by every other Warre wherein one Prince carries himselfe as a judge both of himselfe and of another If a question were among private men it were most unjust to goe to a Forraigne Prince about it Also if there arise a difference betweene a private man and his Soveraigne there are Magistrates appointed which may be sought unto But when the controversie is touching the Common-wealth there neither are nor can be any judges in the City I call that a publike matter when such and so great a part of the Subiects is moved that now there is need of Warre against those that defend themselves by Warre And as if those should come into part of the Principality of the publike and are Peeres to the Prince who can doe so much as hee Even as one King is said to be equall to another who can resist another offering wrong however greater and more powerfull although I say not these things of the Subjects themselves unlesse it be in respect of Forraigne Princes which will ayde the Subject against their Soveraigne and who can ayde them no otherwise then in a controversie as I have expounded of the Common-wealth f And indeede if the Subjects be used more cruelly and unjustly this opinion of defending is approved even of others who both bring that laudable example of Hercules the Lord of Tyrants and Monsters There is also the example of Constantine who ayded the Romans against Maxentius as I noted before We defend Sonnes against injust Fathers Adde now those golden Sayings of Seneca That being cut off whatsoever it was whereby he did cleave unto me the Society of humane right is cut off If he doe not impugne my Countrey but is burdensome to his owne and being bannished my Countrey doth vexe his owne yet so great naughtinesse of minde hath cut him off although it maketh him not an enemy yet hatefull unto mee And the reason of the duty which I owe unto mankinde is both more precious and more powerfull with me then that which I owne to one single man Thus verily or else we make all men forreigners to all Princes if we determine that they can doe according to their pleasure and lust Now what if the cause of the Subject be unjust The foresaid Authors deny that men ought to ayde uniust Forraigne Subjects least any by so ayding introduce the same Law into his owne Kingdome which the Corinthians did before Yea Aristotle thinkes that neither a wicked Father is to be loved nor assisted with helpe But this is false of a Father as I taught in a certaine Disputation perhaps it is more true that those may be defended of us by war who are unjust For if it be a just warre which is to repulse a wrong although they that repulse an injury have given occasion to the warre the same it seemes may be determined in the defence of others even of Subjects for the same reason Surely there is that iniquity in Warre that it will make the same man to pronounce law to himselfe in his owne cause or verily willing to pronounce it Vpon which pretence another Prince may bring ayde on the contrary side that things may more civelly be composed without warre And this is that which Pyrrhus did when he came to ayde the Tarentines against the Romanes he admonished them first that they would by their owne endeavour put an end to the Controversie although neither the Romans would not unjustly hearken unto the King or because they might deservedly suspect him as being sent for by enemies armed with enemies ready to fight for enemies and of kinne to enemies Hee that stands armed with another is said to bring helpe and ayde unto him neither is there neede to proove any thing against that at all Even he that armes himselfe is beleeved to thinke upon warre And if he that is the friend of an enemie bee excluded from being a witnesse much more from being a Iudge For it is easier if any be received for a witnesse then a Iudge The friend of my enemy is not presently ment my enemy as neither my friends friend is my friend but there is a great suspition of them both and of the friend of an enemy the more But I returne to the question We are bound both to defend justly unjust Sonnes against the cruelty of a Father or Servants against the cruelty of a Master and we laudably indeavour that by fury here is Warre no not wicked men should be chastened and punished for fury and warre have no measure And he that led by humanity or pitty or any other approved and just cause hath received another mans Servant is not bound by the Statute of a corrupt Servant and that reception is accompted in the nature of good c. Even he is commended who being angry with his servants committed them to be punished by another this commendation being added because he himselfe was angry Therefore a good Prince will have the Liberty of rage against his own Subjects to be taken from him being angry as a good Father as a good Master and he will alwaies judge That Kingdomes were not made for Kings but Kings for Kingdomes which is most true This also of Plato availeth that we ought to use Eloquence chiefely to accuse our friends to whom it is the best thus to be drawn from future evils And so I thinke that we may defend unjust Forreigne Subjects yet to this end onely for the keeping off immoderate cruelty and too severe punishment Seeing it is not inhumane to doe good to those that have offended Yet I dare affirme that this reason of bringing helpe doth seldome stand
King and Monarch every subject worse than a Turkish slave and exposed to as many uncontrolable Soveraignes as there are Souldiers in the Kings Army be their conditions never so vile their qualitie never so mean and the greatest Peeres on the Parliaments party must be irresistably subject to these new absolute Soveraignes lusts and wills Twelfthly if all these will not yet satisfie Conscience in the Lawfulnesse the justnesse of the Parliaments and peoples present forcible resistance of the Kings Captaines and Forces though Armed with an illegall Commission which makes nothing at all in the case because voyd in Law there is this one Argument yet remaining which will satisfie the most scrupulous malignant opposite Conscience That necessary forcible resistance which is Authorised and Commanded by the Supreamest lawfull power and highest Soveraigne Authority in the Realme must infallibly be just and lawfull even in point of Conscience by the expresse Resolution of Rom. 13. and our opposites owne confession who have no other Argument to prove the Offensive warre on the Kings part Lawfull but because it is commanded and the Parliaments and Subjects Defensive Armes Unlawfull but because prohibited by the King whom they salsely affirm to be the highest Soveraigne power in the Kingdome above the Parliament and whole Realme collectively considered But this resistance of the Kings Popish malignant invading Forces is Authorized and Commanded by the expresse Votes and Ordinances of both Houses of Parliament which I have already undeniably manifested to be the Supreamest Lawfull Power and Soveraignest Authority in the Realme Paramount the King himselfe who is but the Parliaments and Kingdomes Publicke Royall Servant for their good Therefore his Resistance must infallibly be just and Lawfull even in Point of Conscience Thus much for the Lawfulnesse in Court of Conscience of resisting the Kings unjustly assaulting Forces armed with his Commission I now proceede to the justnesse of opposing them by way of forcible resistance when accompanied with his personall presence That the Kings Army of Papists and Malignants invading the Parliaments or Subjects persons goods Lawes Liberties Religion may even in Conscience bee justly resisted with force though accompanied with his person seemes most apparently cleare to me not only by the preceeding Reasons but also by many expresse Authorities recorded and approved in Scripture not commonly taken notice of as First By the ancientest precedent of a defensive warre that we read of in the world Gen. 14. 1. to 24. where the five Kings of Sodom Gomorrah Admah Zeboiim and Zoar rebelling against Chedolaomer King of Nations after they had served him twelve yeeres defended themselves by armes and battle against his assaults and the Kings joyned with him who discomfiting these five Kings pillaging Sodom and Gomorrah and taking Lot and his goods along with them as a pâ—eâ— hereupon Abraham himselfe the Father of the faithfull in defence of his Nephew Lot to rescue him and his substance from the enemie taking with him 318. trained men of his owne family pursued Chedorlaomer and the Kings with him to Dan assaulted them in the night smote and pursued them unto Hoba regained all the goods and prisoners with his Nephew Lot and restored both goods and persons freely to the King of Sodom thereby justifying his and his peoples forcible defence against their invading enemies in the behalfe of his captivated plundred Nephew and Neighbors Secondly by the Example of the Israelities who were not onely King Pharaoh his Subjects but Bondmen too as is evident by Exod ch 1. to 12. Deut. 6. 21. c. 7. 8. c. 15. 15. c. 16. 12. c. 24 18. 22. Ezra 9. 9. Now Moses and Aaron being sent by God to deliveer them from their AEgyptian bondage after 430. yeares captivity under colour of demanding but three dayes liberty to goe into the wildernesse to serve the Lord and Pharoah notwithstanding all Gods Miracles and Plagues refusing still to let them depart till enforced to it by the slaughter of the Egyptians first borne as soone as the Israelites were marching away Pharaoh and the AEgyptians repenting of their departure pursued them with their Chariots and Horses and a great army even to the red Sea to reduce them here upon the Israelites being astonished and murmuring against Moses giving themselves all for dead men Moses sayd unto the people feare ye not stand still and see the Salvation of the Lord which he will shew to you this day for the AEgyptians whom you have seene to day ye shall see them againe no more for ever the Lord shall fight for you c. And hereupon God himselfe discomfited routed and drowned them all in the red Sea I would demaund in this case whether the Isralites might not here lawfully for their owne redemption from unjust bondage have fought against and resisted their Lord King Pharaoh and his invading Host accompanied with his presence had they had power and hearts to doe it as well as God himselfe who fought against and destroyed them on their behalfe If so as all men I thinke must grant unlesse they will censure God himselfe then a defensive warre in respect of life and liberty onely is just and Lawfull even in conscience by this most memorable story Thirdly by that example recorded Iudges 3. 8. 9. 10. where God growing angry with the Israelites for their Apostacie and Idolatry sold them here was a divine title into the hands of Cushan-Rishathaim King of Mesopotamia and the children of Israel served him 8. yeares Here was a lawfull title by conquest and 8 yeeres submission seconding it But when the children of Israel cryed unto the Lord the Lord raised up a deliverer to them even Othniel the sonne of Kenaz and the Spirit of the Lord came upon him and he went out to warre and the Lord delivered Cushan-rishatiam King of Mesopotamia into his hands and his hand prevailed against him so the land had rest 40. yeeres Loe here a just defensive warre approved and raised up by God and his Spirit in an ordinary manner only as I take it by encouraging the Instruments wherein a conquering King for Redemption former liberties is not onely resisted but conquered taken prisoner and his former dominion abrogated by those that served him as conquered subjects Fourthly by the example of Ehud and the Israelites Iudges chap. 3. 11. to 31 where we finde God himself strengthning Eglon King of Moab against the Israelites for their sinnes who thereupon gathering an Army smote Israel possessed their Cities so as the Israelites served this King 18. yeeres Here was a title by conquest approved by God submitted to by the Israelites yet after all this when the children of Israel cryed unto the Lord he raised them up a deliverer namely Ehud who stabbing Eglonn the King in the belly under pretext of private conference with him and escaping he therupon blew the trumpet commanded the Israelites to follow him to the warre slew ten thousand valiant men of
Moah which he subdued and procured rest to his Country 40. yeeres God his Spirit Word approving this his action Fifthly by the example of Barack and Deborah Iudges ch 4. and 5. Where God selling the children of Israel for their sinnes into the hand of Iabin King of Cannan and his Captaine Sisera for 20. yeeres space during which he mightily oppressed them hereupon Barack at the instigation of the Prophetesse Deborah by the command of the Lord God of Israel gathered an Army of ten thousand men which Sisera and the King of Canaan hearing of assembled all their Chariots and Army together at the River of Kishon where the Lord discomfited Sisera and all his Host with the edge of the sword before Barack his Army and subdued Iabin the King of Canaan before the children of Israel which warre is by a speciall Song of Deborah and Barack highly extolled and God in it as most just and honorable and this curse denounced against those that refused to assist in it Iudges 4. 23. Curse ye Meroz saith the Angel of the Lord curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof because they come not out to the helpe of the Lord to the helpe of the Lord against the mighty with this Corolary so that thine enemies parish O Lord but let them that love thee be as the sunne when it goeth forth in his might What more can conscience desire to justifie the lawfulnesse of a just defensive warre Sixthly by the Example of Gideon and the Israelites Iudges c. 6. Who being delivered by God into the hands of the Prince of Midian for seven years Gideon by speciall incouragement and direction from God himselfe with a poore despicable Army of 300. men defeated the great Hoast of the Midianites and tooke and slew their Princes By these 4 last pregnant presidents it is most evident that a forraigne King who hath gained a Title onely by conquest though with divine concurrence by way of punishment for that peoples sinne may lawfully be resisted repulsed even after some yeares forced subjection and submission to him by the people conquered to regaine their former liberties Seventhly by the precedent of Abimelech King of Shechem who being elected King by the voluntary assents of the people God afterwards sending an evill spirit of division between Abimelech and the men of Shechem thereupon they revolted from him and chusing Gael for their Captaine fortified the City against him and when Abimelech came with an Army to take in the Towne they in their defence went forth and fought with him resisted his seige and they of the Tower of Shechem standing upon their guard refused to surrender it after the Towne was surprised and so were burnt After which comming too neare the wals at the Tower of Thebez assaulted by Abimelech he had his braines and head so bruised with the peece of a milstone cast downe upon him by a woman that he called hastily to his Armour-bearer and said unto him draw thy sword and slay me that men say not of me a woman slew him whereupon he thrust him through that he dyed and so every man departed to his place Thus God rendred the wickednesse of Abimelech and all the evill of the men of Shechem upon their own heads Iudges 9. So the Text. Eightly by the example of Iepthah who after that God had sold the Israelites for their Idolatry into the hands of the children of Ammon 18. yeeres space Iepthah being made head and Captaine by the Elders and people of Gilead first argued the case with the King of Ammon touching the unjustnesse of his warre upon them desiring God to be Iudge betweene them and then by Gods assistance smote and subdued the Ammonites and their Cities Judg. c. 11. And so cast off their yoake Ninthly By the practise of Sampson who after God had delivered the Israâ—lities into the hands of the Philistimes who ruled over them forty yeares space did by Gods extraordinary assistance oft encounter slay and resist the Philistimes rescuing the oppressed Israelites from their vassalage and at his death slew more of them then in his life Iudg. c. 13. to 17. which deliverance was afterwards perfected by Samuel 1 Sam. 7. and approved nay wrought by God Tenthly by the Example of David who being persecuted by fedifragous dissembling King Saul his father-in-law a notable patterne of the inconstancie and invaliditie of Kings solemnest oathes and Protestations who contrary to many solemne vowes and feighned reconciliations sought unjustly to deprive him of his life thereupon David retired from the Court entertained a guard of foure hundred men and became a Captaine over them 1 Sam. 22. 2. After which Abiather escaping to him from Nob when the Priests there were slaine by Doeg upon Saules command for Davids sake David used these words to him Abide thou with me feare not for â—e that seeketh thy life seeketh my life but with me thou shalt be in safeguard 1 Sam. 22. 23. Soone after the Philistimes beseiging Keilah David by Gods encouragement smote them and saved Keilah intending there to secure himselfe and his men which Saul hearing of said God hath delivered him into my hands for he is shut in by entring into a Towne which hath gates and barres whereupon he called all the people together to beseige David and his men which he needed not doe did he or any else beleeve that they would not ought not to have made any forcible resistance David informed hereof enquired seriously of God whether Saul would certainely come downe and demanded twice of him will the men of Keila deliver me and my men up into his hand And the Lord said they will deliver thee up Had not David and his men resolved to fortifie and defend themselves there if the men of Keilah would have beene faithfull to them and beleeved they might have resisted Saul with his Forces certainely he would never have presumed to aske such a question twice together of God himselfe to receive his resolution therein neither would God have vouchased an answere thereto but his double inquirie and Gods resolution infallibly demonstrate his intention to resist and the lawfulnes of his defensive resistance would the Keilites have adhered to him This the very next words fully cleare 1 Sam. 23. 13. Then David and his men about six hundred arose and departed out of Keilah and went wheresoever they could goe and it was told Saul the David was escaped from Keilah Gods prediction of the Keilites treachery was the onely cause of their departure thence where they had resolved to defend themselves of which hope being disappointed beyond expectation they want whither soever they could goe After which David and his men being but few in number not able in humane probability without tempting God to encounter Sauls great Forces retired themselves into woods mountaines rocks strong holds wildernesses where Saul pursuing them they still declined him but had he and his army ever assaulted
them no doubt they would and might lawfully have defended themselves else why did they joyne themselves in a body why retire to strong holds and places of advantage why twice urge David to kill Saul in cold blood when he did not actually assault him but came causually unawares within his danger Why did David himselfe say even when he spared his life when he was a sleepe 1 Sam. 26. 10. As the Lord liveth the Lord shall smite him or his day shall come to dye or he shall descend into battell and perish but that if he had given him battle he might have defended himselfe against him though Saul should casually or wilfully perish in the fight And why was David so importunate to goe up against him with King Achish to the battle wherein he perished 1 Sam. 29. were resistance of him in case he assaulted him and his Forces utterly unlawfull This precedent of David then if rightly weighed is very punctuall to prove the justnesse of a defensive warre of which more anon and no evidence at all against it Eleventhly by the practise of the 10 Tribes who after their revolt from Rehoboam for giving them an harsh indiscreet answere to their just demands setting up another King and Kingdome even by divine approbation Rehoboam thereupon raising a great Army to fight against and reduce them to his obdience God himselfe by Semaiah the Prophet sent this expresse inhibition to Rehoboam and his Army Thus saith the Lord ye shall not go up nor fight against your brethren returne every man to his house FOR THIS IS DONE OF ME Whereupon the obeyed the Word of the Lord and returned 1 Kings 12. 2 Chron. c. 10. and 11. After which long warres continued betweene these Kingdomes by reason of this revolt wherein the ten Tribes and Kings of Israel still defended themselves with open force and that justly as the Scripture intimates 2 Chron. 12. 14 15. though that Ieroboam and the Israelites falling to Idolaty were afterwards for their Idolatry not revolt defeated by Abiah and the men of Iudah who relied upon God 2 Chron. 13. Twelfthly by the example of the King of Moab and his people who Rebelling against Iehoram King of Israel and refusing to pay the annuall Tribute of Lambes and Rammes formerly rendred to him hereupon Iehoram Iehoshaphat and the King of Edom raising a great Army to invade them the Moalites hearing of it gathered all that were able to put on Armour and upward and stood in the border to resist them 2 King 3 4 to 27. And by the practise of the Edâ—mites who revolting from under the hand of Iudah made a King over themselves Whereupon Ioram King of Iudah going up with his Forces against them to Zair they encompassed him in their owne defence and though they fled into their Tents yet they revolted from Iudah till this day and Libnah too 2 Kings 8. 20 21. 22. Thirteenthly by the example of Samaria which held out 3. yeeres siege against Shalmazezer King of Assyria notwithstanding their King Hoshea had by force submitted himselfe and his Kingdome to him and became his servant 2 Kings 17. 3. to 10. c. 18. 9. 10. Fourteenthly by the practise of godly Hezechiah who after the Lord was with him and prospered him whethersoever he went REBELLED against the King of Assyria and served him not as some of his predecessors had done 2 Kings 18. 7. whereupon the King of Assyria and his Captaines comming up against him with great Forces and invading his Country he not only fortified his Cities and encouraged his people manfully to withstand them to the utter most but actually resisted the Assyrians even by divine direction and encouragement and upon his prayer God himself by his Angel for his and Jerusalems preservation miraculously slew in the Campe of the King of Assria in one night an hundred fourescore and five thousand mighty men of valour Captaines and Leaders so as he returned with shame of face to his owne Land 2 King c. 18. and 19. 2 Chron. c. 32. I say c. 36. and â—7 An Example doubtlesse lawfull beyond exception ratified by God himselfe and his Angel too Fifteenthly by the examples of King Iehoiakim and Jehoiakin who successively rebelling against the King of Babylon who subdued and put them to a tribute did likewise successively defend themselves against his invasions seiges though with ill successe by reason of their grosse Idolatries and other sins not of this their revolt and defence to regaine their freedomes condemned only in Zeâ—echia for breach of his oath whereby they provoked God to give them up to the will of their enemies and to remove them out of his sight 2 King c. 24. 25 2 Chr. 36. Ier. c. 37. 38 39. Finally by the History of the Maccabees and whole state of the Iews defensive wars under them which though but Apochryphall in regard of the compiler yet no doubt they had a divine Spirit concurring with them in respect of the managing and Actors in them I shall give you the summe thereof very succinctly Antioâ—us Epiphanes conquering Ierusalem spoyled it and the Temple set up Heathenish customes and Idolatry in it subverted Gods worship destroyed the Bookes of Gods Law forced the people to forsake God to sacrifice to Idols slew and persecuted all that opposed and exercised all manner of Tyranny against them Hereupon Mattathias a Priest and his Sonnes moved with a godly zeale refusing to obey the Kings Command in falling away from the Religion of his Fathers slew a Iew that sacrificed to an Idoll in his presence together with the Kings Commissary who compelled men to Sacrifice and pulled downe their Idolatrous Altar which done they fled into the mountaines whither all the well-affected Iewes repaired to them Whereupon the Kings Forces hearing the premises pursued them and warred against them on the Sabbath day whereupon they out of an over-nice superstition least they should prophane the Sabbath by fighting on it when assaulted answered them not neither cast a stone at them nor stopped the places where they were hid but said let us dye all in our innocencie heaven and earth shall testifie for us that your put us to death wrongfully whereupon they slew both them their wives and children without resistance to the number of a thousand persons Which Mattathias and the rest of their friends hearing of mourned for them right sore and said one to another marke their speech if we all doe as our brethren have done and fight not for our lives and Lawes against the Heathen they will now quickly roote us out of the earth therefore they decreed saying whosoever shall come to make battle with us on the Sabbath day we will fight against him neither will we doe all as our brethren that were murthered in their secret places Whereupon they presently gathered and united their Forces assaulted their enemies recovered their Cities Lawes Liberties defended themselves manfully
and fought many battles with good successe against the severall kings who invaded and layd claime to their Country as you may reade at large in the bookes of Maccabees All these examples most of them mannaged by the most pious religious persons of those dayes prescribed and assisted by God himselfe whose Spirit specially encouraged strengthned the hands and Spirits of the undertakers of them as Osiander well observes and therefore cannot be condemned as unjust without blasphemy and impiety in my opinion are a most cleare demonstration of the lawfulnesse of a defensive warre in point of Divinity and Conscience against Kings and their Armies who wrongfully invade or assault their Subjects though themselves be personally present in their armies to countenance their unlawfull warres and likewise evidence that a Royall title gotten forcibly by conquest onely though continued sundry yeares is not so valid in point of conscience but that it may be safely questioned yea rejected there being no true lawfull Title of Soveraignety over any people but that which originally depends upon their owne free election and unconstrained subjection simply considered or which is subsequently seconded therewith after a possession got by force or conquest Now that the kings personall presence cannot justifie the unjust actions or protect the persons of those that assist him in any unlawfull action contrary to the Lawes of God or the Realme is a truth so evident that it needes no proofe it being no part of the kings Royall prerogative or Office but diametrally repugnant to it either to doe injury himselfe or to authorize or protect others in committing it as I have elsewhere proved at large Therefore it can administer no patronage nor defence at all to those who accompany his person in the unjust invasions of his Subjects nor dis-able them to defend or repulse their unjust assaults and rapines For suppose a King should so farre degenerate and dishonour himselfe as personally to accompany a packe of theeves who should rob his subjects on the high way break up their houses in the night or practise Piracie on the Sea or commit Rapes or murthers on his people every where I thinke no man so voyd of Reason Law Conscience but would readily grant that the Subjects in all these cases might lawfully defend themselves by force against these Robbers Theeves Murtherers notwithstanding the Kings presence or association with them whose personall Prerogatives and immunity from assaults or violence being incommunicable underivable to any other and peculiar to himselfe alone he can transfere no such protection to others who accompany him in their injurious practises and that these Acts of theirs are direct fellonie and murther for which they might be justly apprehended condemned executed though thus countenanced by the Kings owne presence And if this be truth as our Law-bookes resolve and the Scripture to in places forecited the kings presence can no more deprive the subjects of their necessary just defence against his Popish Forces assaults nor justifie their proceedings or the present unjust offensive warre then in the former cases there being the selfe-same reason in both warres being in truth but greater and more detestable Murders and Robberies when they are unjust as Cyprian Augustine with others rightly define Thirdly personall unjust assaults and violence even of Kings themselves may in some cases lawfully be resisted by subjects This Doctor Ferne himselfe acknowledgeth Sect. 2. p. 9. Personall defence is lawfull against the sudden much more then against the premeditated and illegall assaults of such Messengers of the King yea OF THE PRINCE HIMSELFE THVS FARRE to ward his blowes to hold his hands and the like not to endanger his person not to returne blowes no for though it be naturall to defend a mans selfe yet the whole common-wealth is concerned in his person the king therefore himselfe much more in his Cavalliers may thus farre at least safely be resisted in point of conscience And that he may be so indeed is manifest by two pregant Scripture examples The first is that of King Saul 1 Sam 14. 38. to 46. where Ionathan and his Armour-bearer routing the Philistimes whole Army violated his Father Sauls command of which he was wholy ignorant in taking a little honey one the end of his sticke in the pursuite hereupon king Saul most rashly and unjustly vowed twice one after another to put him to death whereupon the people much discontented with this injustice were so farre from submitting to the Kings pleasure in it that they presently said to the king shall Jonathan dye who hath wrought so great Salvation in Israel God forbid As the Lord liveth there shall not one haire of his head fall to the ground So the people RESCVED JONATHAN that he dyed not though he were not onely King Sauls Subject but Sonne too Indeede it appeares not in the Text that Saul offered any violence to Ionathans person or the people to Sauls and it may be the peoples peremptory vow and unanimous resolution to defend Jonathan from this unjust sentence of death against him made Saul desist from his vowed bloody intendment but the word rescued with other circumstances in the story seeme to intimate that Ionathan was in hold to be put to death and that the people forcibly rescued him out of the executioners hands However certainely their vow and speeches declare that if Saul himselfe or any other by his commanded had assaulted Ionathan to take away his life they would have forcibly resisted them and preserved his life though with losse of their owne beleeving they might lawfully doe it else they would not have made this resolute vow nor could they have performed it had Saul wilfully proceeded but by a forcible rescue and resistance of his personall violence The other is that of king Vzziah 2 Chron. 27. 16. to 22. who presumptuously going into the Temple against Gods Law to burne incense on the Altar Azariah the high Priest and with him fourescore Priests of the Lord that were valiant men went in after him and WITHSTOOD or resisted Vzziah the king and said unto him It appertaineth not unto thee Vzziah to burne incense unto the Lord but to the Priests the sonnes of Aaron that are consecrated to burne insence go out of the Sanctuary for thou hast trespassed neither shall iâ— be for thine honour from the Lord God Then Vzziah was wroth and had a censor in his hand to burne incense and whiles he was wroth with the Priests the Leprosie rose up in his forehead And Azariah and all the Priests looked upon him and behold he was Leprous in his forehead AND THEY THRVST HIM OVT FROM THENCE yea himselfe hasted also to goe out because the Lord had smitten him If then these Priests thus actually resisted King Vzziah in this sinfull Act thrusting him perforce out of the Temple when he would but offer incense much more might they would they have done it had he violently assaulted their
persons If any king shall unjustly assault the persons of any private Subjects men or women to violate their lives or chastities over which they have no power I make no doubt that they may and ought to bee resisted repulsed even in point of conscience but not slaine though many kings have lost their lives upon such occasions as Rodoaldus the 8. king of Lumbardy Anno 659. being taken in the very act of adultery by the adulteresses husband was slaine by him without delay and how kings attempting to murther private Subjects unjustly have themselves beene sometimes wounded and casually slaine is so rise in stories that I shall forbeare examples concluding this with the words of Iosephus who expressely writes That the King of the Israelites by Gods expresse Law Deut. 17. was to doe nothing without the consent of the high Priest and Senate nor to multiply money and horses over much which might easily make him a contemner of the Lawes and if he addicted himselfe to these things more than was fitting HE WAS TO BE RESISTED least he became more powerfull then was expedient for their affaires To these Authorities I shall onely subjoyne these 5. undeniable arguments to justifie Subjects necessary defensive wars to be lawful in point of conscience against the persons and Forces of their injuriously invading Soveraignes First it is granted by all as a truth irrefragable that kings by Force of Armes may justly with safe conscience resist repulse suppresse the unlawfull warlike invasive assaults the Rebellious armed Insurrections of their Subjects upon these two grounds because they are unlawfull by the Edicts of God and man and because kings in such case have no other meanes left to preserve their Royall persons and just authoritie against offensive armed Rebellions but offensive armes Therefore Subjâ—cts by the selfe-same grounds may justly with safe consciences resist repulse suppresse the unjust assayling military Forces of their kings in the case fore-stated though the king himselfe be personally present and assistant because such a war is unlawfull by the resolution of God and men and against the oath the duty of kings and because the subjects in such cases have no other meanes left to preserve their persons lives liberties estates religion established government from certaine ruin but defensive Armes There is the selfe same reason in both cases being relatives therefore the selfesame Law and Conscience in both Secondly It must be admitted without debate that this office of highest and greatest trust hath a condition in Law annexed to it by Littletons owne resolution to wit that the King shall well and truely preserve the Realme and do that which to such Office belongeth which condition our king by an expresse oath to all his people solemnely taken at their Coronation with other Articles expressed in their oath formerly recited is really bound both in Law and Conscience exactly to performe being admitted and elected king by the peoples suffrages upon solemne promise to observe the same condition to the uttermost of his power as I have a elsewhere cleared Now it is a cleare case resolved by Marius Salomonius confirmed at large by Rebussus by 12. unanswerable reasons the Authorities of sundry Civill Lawyers and Canonists quoted by hiâ— agreed by Albericus Gentiles and Hugo Grotius who both largely dispute it That Kings as well as Subjects are really bound to performe their Covenants Contracts Conditions especially those they make to all their Subjects and ratifie with an Oath since God himselfe who is most absolute is yet mostf firmly oblieged by his Oathes and Covenants made to his despicable vile ereatures sinfull men and never violates them in the least degree If then these conditions and Oathes be firme and obligatory to our kings if they will obstinately breake them by violating their Subjects Lawes Liberties Properties and making actuall warre upon them the condition and Oath too would be meerely voyde ridiculous absur'd an high taking of the Name of God in vaine yea a plaine delusion of the people if the whole State or people in their owne defence might not justly take up Armes to resist their kings and their malignant Forces in these persidious violations of trust conditions oaths and force them to make good their oath and covenants when no other means will induce them to it Even as the Subjects oath of homage and allegiance would be meerely frivilous if kings had no meanes nor coercive power to cause them to observe these oathes when they are apparently broken and many whole kingdomes had been much over seene in point of Policie or prudence in prescribing such conditions and oaths unto their kings had they reserved no lawfull power at all which they might lawfully exercise in point of conscience to see them really performed and duely redressed when notoriously transgressed through wilfulnesse negligence or ill pernicious advice Thirdly when any common or publick trust is committed to three or more though of subordinate and different quality if the trust be either violated or betrayed the inferiour trustees may and ought in point of Conscience to resist the other For instance if the custody of a City or Castle be committed to a Captaine Leutenant and common Souldiers or of a ship to the Master Captaine and ordinary Mariners If the Captaine or Master will betray the City Castle or ship to the enemie or Pirates or dismantle the City wals and fortifications to expose it unto danger or will wilfully run the ship against a rocke to split wrecke it and indanger all their lives freedomes contrary to the trust reposed in them or fire or blow up the City Fort ship not onely the Leiutenant Masters Mate and other inferiour Officers though subject to their commands but even the Common Souldiers and Marriners may withstand and forcibly resist them and are bound in Conscience so to doe because else they should betray their trust and destroy the City Fort ship and themselves too which they are bound by duty and compact to preserve This case of Law and conscience is so cleare so common in daily experience that no man doubts it The care and safety of our Realme by the originall politicke constitution of it alwayes hath beene and now is committed joyntly to the king the Lords and Commons in Parliament by the unanimous consent of the whole kingdome The king the supreame member of it contrary to the trust and duty reposed in him through the advise of evill Councellors wilfully betrayes the trust and safety of this great City and ship of the Republicke invades the inferiour Commanders Souldiours Citizens with an Army assaults wounds slayes spoyles plunders sackes imprisons his fellow trustees Souldiers Marriners Citizens undermines the walls fires the City ship delivers it up to theeves Pyrates murtherers as a common prey and wilfully runnes this ship upon a rocke of ruin If the Lords and Commons joyntly intrusted with him should not in this case by
force of Armes resist him and his unnaturall instruments there being no other meanes else of safety left them they should sinfully and wilfully betray their trust and be so farre from keeping a good Christian Conscience in not resisting by force that they should highly sinne against Conscience against their trust and duty against their naturall Country yea and their very Allegiance to the king himselfe by encouraging him in and consenting unto these proceedings which would make him not to be a king but Tyrant and destroy him as a king in the spoyle and ruine of his Kingdome thereby endangered to be consumed and tempt God himself as Pope Nicholas and Gratian resolve in these words If there be no necessity we ought at all times to abstaine from warres but if inevitable necessity urge us we ought not to abstaine from warres and warlike preparations for the defence of our selves of our Country and paternall Lawes no not in Lent least man should seeme to tempt God if when he hath meanes he provide not for his owne and others safety and prevents not the Detriments of holy religion Fourthly those injuries which Allies and other neighbour States or Princes may with good Conscience repulse with Armes from Subjects wrongfully oppressed invaded tyrannically by their Soveraignes or their wicked Instruments at or without the Subjects intreaty when they are unable to relieve themselves no doubt the Subjects themselves if able may with better reason and as good Conscience resist and repell because every man is nearer and more oblieged to defend and preserve himselfe and those of his owne Nation Religion blood then strangers are and may with lesse publick danger inconvenience and more speede effect it then Forraigners but Allies and Forraigne Neighbour States and Princes as Gratian oâ—t of the 5. Councell of Carthage Augustine Ambrose Hierom Anastatius Calistus and other Albericus Gentilis John Bodin a Huga Grotius and Generally all â—â—nonists Casuists Schoâ—lemen accord may in many cases with good conscience by forâ— of Arms repulse from Subjects wrongfully oppressed invaded and tyrannically abused the injuries offered them by their Soveraignes and that either at and in some cases without the Subjects intreaty Which they prove by Moses his slaying the AEgyptian that oppressed the Hebrew Exod. 2. 11. to 15. by Joshua his ayding of the Gibeonites against the five Kings that made war against them Josh 10. by the example of Jehoshaphat 1 Kin. 22. 2 Kings 3. Of the chiefe Captaines securing Paul with a gard of Souldiers against the Iews who had vowed his death Acts 23. by Abrahams rescuing Lot Gen. 14. by sundry ancieâ—t and late Examples in story Therfore Subjects themselves no doubt if able may with good reason and conscience lawfully resist and repell their Princes invading Forces though accompanied assisted with his personall presence Fifthly It is yeelded by all Divines Lawyers Canonists Schoolemen as Gratian Banâ—es Seto Lessius Vasquius Covaruviâ—s Aquinas Sylvester Bartolus Baldus Navarre Albericus Gentilis Grotius and others that private men by the Law of God and nature may in defence of their lives chastities principall members and estates lawfully resist all those who forcibly assault them to deprive them thereof yea and slay them to unlesse they be publicke persons of eminencie by whose slaughter the Commonweale should sustaine much prejudice whose lives in such cases must not be willingly hazzarded though their violence be resisted which is cleerely prooved by Iudges 11. 8. 15. to 18. 1 Sam. 17. 41. to 53. Deut. 22. 26. 27. since therefore all these are apparently indangered by an invasive warre and Army more then by any private assaults and no ayde no assistance or protection against the losse of life chastitie estate and other violences injuries which accompany wars can be expected from the Lawes or Prince himself the fountaine of this injustice or legall punishments inflicted on the malefactors whose armed power being above the reach of common justice and injuries countenanced abetted authorised by the Soveraine who should avenge and punish them every subject in particular and the whole state in Parliament assembled in generall may and ought in point of conscience joyntly and severally to defend themselves their neighbours brethren but especially their native Countrey Kingdome whose generall safety is to be preferred before the lives of any particular persons how great or considerable soever which may be casually hazarded by their owne wilfulnesse though not purposely endangered or cut off in the defensive incounter by those who make resistance And if according to Cajetan and other Schoolemen Innocents which onely casually hinder ones flight from a mortall enemie may be lawfully with good conscience slaine by the party pursued in case where he cannot else possibly escape the losse of his owne life because every mans owne life is dearer to him then anothers which he here takes away onely to preserve his owne life without any malicious murtherous intent though others doubt of this case or if innocent persons set perforce in the front of unjust assailants as by the Cavalleires at Brainford and elsewhere to prevent defence and wrong others with more securitie and lesse resistance may casually be slain though not intentionally by the defensive party as I thinke they may for prevention of greater danger and the publicke safety then certainely those of publicke place and Note who wilfully and unnaturally set themselves to ruine their Country Liberty Religion Innocent brethren who onely act the defensive part and voluntarily intrude themselves into danger may questionlesse with safe conscience be resisted repulsed in which if they casually chance to lose their lives without any malice or ill intention in the defendants it being onely through their owne default such a casuall accident when it happens or the remote possibility of it in the combate before it begins cannot make the resistance either unjust or unlawfull in point of conscience for then such a possibility of danger to a publike person should make all resistance unlawfull deprive the Republicke wholly of this onely remedy against tyrannicall violence and expose the whole common-weale to ruine whose weale and safety is to be preferred before the life or safety of any one member of it whatsoever Having thus at large evinced the lawfulnesse of Subjects necessary forcible resistance defensive wars against the unjust offensive Forces of their Soveraignes I shall in the next place answere the principall arguments made against it some whereof for ought I finde are yet unanswered These Objections are of foure sorts out of the Old Testament the New from reason from the example of the primitive Christians backed with the words of some Fathers I shall propound and answere them in order The first out of the Old Testament is that of Numb 16. Korah Dathan and Abiram for their insurrection against that very divine Authority which God himselfe
nor their wives nor their children clearly were actuall much lesse anointed Kings For first they lived long before the government of kings was erected among the Israelites of whom Saul was the first 2. They had no kingdom nor territories of their own when these words were uttered but were strangers in the Land going from one Nation and Kingdom to another sojourning obscurely like Pilgrims and Strangers upon earth in Egypt and Gerar under King Pharaoh Abimelech and other Princes not as kings but subjects and private men as Verse 12. 13. Gen. 12. and 20. and 26 Chap. 36. 7. Chap. 37. 1. Deut. 23. 7. Hebr. 11. 13. resolve Thirdly They were but very few men in number Verse 12. Genesis 34. 30. they were Masters onely of their own small families and that under forraign Kings therfore doubtlesse no kings at all Fourthly this was spoken of these Patriarchs Wives and Families as well as of themselves and they certainly were no kings unlesse you will have kingdoms consisting onely of kings and no subjects at all Verse 12. 14. Gen. 12. 15. to 20. Chap. 20. 2. to 17. Chap. 26. 11. Chap. 34. 30. Chap. 35. 6. Fifthly the Scripture no where calls them kings much lesse the Text which terms them expresly Prophets Touch not mine Anointed and do MY PROPHETS not properly so taken but largely that is My servants my chosen people as Verse 6. expounds it no harm The later Clause Do my Prophets no harm being an exact interpretation of the former Touch not mine Anointed that is My Prophets and Servants so far forth as to do them harm For in a common sence no doubt they might be touched without offence to God or them by way of imbracement assistance and the like Sixtly Though there were kings in Abrahams dayes or before as is evident by Gen. 14. 1 2 c. yet there were no anointed kings nor were kings ever called Gods anointed till Sauls dayes who was the first anointed King I read of 1 Sam. 10. 1. and the first king ever stiled The Lords Anointed 1 Sam. 12. 3 5. whereas Priests were anointed long before Exodus 30. 30. Chap. 40. 13 15. Therefore Anointed in the Text cannot be meant of kings or of persons actually anointed but onely of those Saints of God who were metapâ—â—rically and spiritually anointed having the gifts and graces of Gods Spirit Psal 28. 8 9. Hab. 3. 13. 2. Cor. 1. 21. 1 Iohn 2. 27. Eze. 16. 9. Isay 20. 27. This Text then being not meant of kings which are actually but of Christians onely spiritualy anointed in regard of which anointing as I have elsewhere largely manifested they are in Scripture not onely stiled Christians which in plain English is annoynted Acts 11. 26. c. 26. 26. 1 Pet. 4. 16. but Christ in the abstract 1 Cor. 12. 12. Ephes 4. 12 13. the Members Body Flesh and Bones of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12 7. Ephes 1. 22. 23 c. 5. 29 30 31. Col. 1. 24. Yea Kings and Priests unto God the Father Exod. 19. 6. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Revel 1. 6. c. 5. 10. c. 20. 6. for whom God hath prepared a heavenly Kingdom wherein they shall reign with Christ for ever with an everlasting Crown of glory too Matth. 5. 3. c. 25. 34. Luke 6. 20. c. 22. 29. 30. Col. 1. 13. 2 Thess 2. 12. 1 Corinth 9. 25. 2 Tim. 2. 12. c. 4. 8. Heb. 12. 28. 2 Pet. 5. 4. 2 Pet. 1. 11. Iam. 2. 5. Revel 22. 5. The proper argument then that can be thence deduced by our Opposites is but this Non sequitur Kings themselves must not touch Gods spiritually anointed Saints and servants to do them harm Ergo if Kings do violently and unjustly make warre upon them not onely to harm but plunder murther destroy them utterly extirpate that Religion they professe and are bound to maintain they are obliged in point of conscience under pain of damnation not to resist Whereas the conclusion should be directly contrary Therefore they may lawfully with good conscience resist them to the uttermost in such cases For since God hath thus directly enjoyned Kings Not to touch or do them harm if Kings will wilfully violate this injunction they may with safe conscience by force of Arms withstand repulse their unjust violence and hinder Kings or their instruments from doing them that iniury which God himself prohibits else they should be accessories to their kings iniustice and authors of their own wrongs according to these received Maximes Qui non pohibet malum quod potest jubet Qui potest obviare perturbare perversos non facit nihil est aliud quam favere eorum impietati Nec caret scrupulo societatis occultae qui manifesto facinori desinit obviâ—re Qui definit obviare cum potest consentit used by Ambrose Hierome Augustine Isiodor Anastatius and Gratian who recites applies them to defensive wars And if our Opposites who pervert this Text by translating it from Subjects and Saints to Kings may in their erronious sence safely argue thence That if subiects take up Arme against their Princes contrary to this Text their Princes may by vertue of this precept iustly resist them with force and repulse their iniuries then by the true genuine sence thereof being meant of Subiects Saints not Kings if Kings will violently assault and make war upon Saints their Subiects to harm them they may with as good reason and conscience defend themselves against their Kings and ill Instruments as their Kings protect themselves in this sort against them and that by authoritie of this Text by our Opposites own argumentation Thirdly admit this Scripture meant of Kings yet what strength is there in it to priviledge them from iust necessary resistance If any it must rest in the word annointed but this will afford kings no such corporall priviledges as many fancie neither from lawfull resistance nor deposition nor sentence of death it self which I shall undeniably evidence to refute a commonly received errour For first it is apparent that the anointed here meant are such onely who are spiritually annointed either with the externall profession and ceremonies of Gods true religion or with the internall graces of the Spirit for neither Abraham Isaac Iacob nor their families nor any kings or Priests in their dayes for ought we finde were corporally annointed Besides the annointing here intended is that which is common to Priests and Prophets as Touch not mine annointed and do my Prophets no harm infallibly proves rather then that which is peculiar to kings Whence I thus argue That annointing which is common to subiects as well as kings and cannot secure any subiects who in the genuinesence of the Text are Gods annointed from iust resistance corporall violence legall censures or death cannot in or of it self alone secure kings from any of these no further then it secures subiects for the annointing being the same in both must have the self-same operation and immunities in
both But this anointing in subiects can neither exempt their persons from necessary iust resistance if they unlawfully assault or war upon their Superiours equalls inferiours nor free them from arrests imprisonments arraignments deprivations or capitall censures if they offend and demerit them as we all know by Scripture and experience Therefore it can transfer no such corporall immunities or exemptions from all or any of these to kings but onely exempt them from unlawfull violence and injuries in point of right so far forth as it doth other Subjects In a word this annointing being common to all Christians can give no speciall Prerogative to Kings but onely such as are common to all Subiects as they are Christians Secondly admit it be meanâ— of an actuall externall anoynting yet that of it self affords Kings no greater priviledge then the inward unction of which it is a type neither can it priviledge them from just resistance or just corporall censures of all sorts First it cannot priviledge them from the iust assaults invasions resistance corporall punishments of other forraign kings Princes States Subiects not subordinate to them who upon any iust cause or quarrell may lawfully resist assault wound apprehend imprison slay depose iudge censure forraigne kings even to death as is apparent by Sâ—hon King of the Amorites and Og the king of Bashan slain the King of Ai hanged by Ioshua the five kings of Canaan that besieged Gibeon on whose ne-ks Ioshua made his men of war to put their feet then smote slew and hanged them upon five trees Who also assaulted resisted imprisoned condemned slew executed divers other kings of Canaan to the number of thirty one in all by king Adonibezek Eglon Agag with other Heathen Kings imprisoned stabbed hewen in pieces by the Israelites If any obiect These kings were not actually annoynted which they cannot prove since Cyrus an Heathen King is stiled Gods annoynted no doubt Saul was an annoynted King if not the first in the world 1 Sam. 10. 1. yet he was justly resisted wounded pursued by the Philistines 1 Sam. 31. 3. Iosiah an annoynted good King was slain by Pharaoh Necho King of Egypt whom he rashly encountred King Ahab was slain by an Archer of the King of Assyria King Ioram and Ahaziah were both slain by Iehu by Gods command Iehoaaz was deposed by the King of Egypt Iehoiakim and Iehoiakin both deposed fettered and kept prisoners by the King of Babylon bylone who also y appâ—eherded dâ—posed judicially condemned King Zedechiah put out his eyes and sent him prisoner to Bâ—hylon bound with fetters of brasse So Manasses was deposed bound with fetters of brasse and carryed captive by the Captaines of the King of Assyria Amaziah King of Iudah was taken prisoner by Iehoash King of Israel Infiâ—ite are the presidents in stories where kings of one Nation in just warrs have been assaulted invaded imprisoned deposed slain by Princes and Subjects of another Nation and that justly as all grant without exception neither their annointing nor Kingship being any exemption or priviledge to them at all in respect of forraigners in cases of hostility to whom they are no Soveraigns no more then to any of their Subjects Whereas if this royall annointing did make their persons absolutly sacred and inviolable no forraign Princes or Subjects could justly apprehend imprison smite wound slay depose or execute them Secondly Kings who are suborordinate Homagers and Subjects to other Kings or Emperours though annointed may for Treasons and Rebellions against them he lawfully resisted assaulted imprisoned deposed judged to death and executed because as to them they are but Subjects notwithâ—â—anging their annointing as appears by sundâ—y presidents in our own and forraign Histories and is generally confessed by the learned Thirdly the Roman Greek and German Experours though annointed the ancient Kings of France Spain Arragon Britain Hungary Poland Denmarke Bohemia India Sparta and other places who were not absolute Monarchs have in former ages been lawfully resisted imprisoned deposed and some of them judicially adjudged to death and executed by their owne Senates Parliaments Diets States for their oppression mal-administration tyranny and that justly as Bodin Grotius with others affirm notwithstanding any pretence that they were annointed Soveraigns Fourthly Popes Bishops and Priests anciently were and at this present in the Romish Churches are actually annointed as well as Kings and we know the Popish Clergy and Canonists have frequently alledged this Text Touch not mine annointed and doe my Prophets no harme in Councels Decretalls and solemâ— debates in Parliament to prove their exemption from the arrests judgements capitall censâ—res and proceedings of Kings and secular Iudges for any crimes whatsoever because forsooth they were Gods annointed intended in this Text not Kings therefore Kings and Seculars must not touch nor offer any the least violence to their persons no not in a way of justice By colour of this Text they exceedingly deluded the world in this particular for â—undreds of yeeres But in the seventh yeer of Hen. the 8. in Dr. Standish his case debated before a Committee of both Houses of Parliament and all the Iudges of England this Text being chiefly insisted on to prove the Clergies exemption Jure Divino was wholly exploded in England and since that in Germany France other Realms and notwithstanding its protection many Fopes Bishops and Clergy-men in all Kingdomes ages for all their annointing have for their misdemeanors not only been resisted apprehended imprisones but deprived degraded hanged quartered burned as well as other men Yea Abiathar the High Priest was deposed by S. â—omon for his Treason against him notwithstanding his Annointing their annointing giving them not the smallest immunity to doe ill or not to suffer all kinds of corporall capitall punishments for their misdemeanors If this actuall annointing then cannot lawfully exempt or secure Priests and Prelates persons nor the Pope himselfe from the premises how then can it justly priviledge the persons of Kings Fifthly among the Papists all infants either in their baptisme or confirmation are actually annointed with their consecrated Chrisme and with extream unction to boot at last cast which they make a Sacrament and so a thing of more divine soveraign Nature then the very annointing of Kings at their inauguration which they repute no Sacrament as being no where commanded by God But neither of these actuall unctions exempt all or any of those annointed with it from resistance or any corporall punishments or just censures of any king therefore the very annointing of Kings cannot doe it Sixthly the Ceremony of annointing kings as Cassanaeus with others write is peculiar onely to the German Emperor the King of Ierusalem the King of France the King of England and the King of Sicily but to no other kings else who are neither annointed nor crowned as he affirmes so that it cannot give any priviledge
at all to any but onely to these 4. not other kings who are not anointed Now seeing only hese 4. kings are actually anointed yea lawfull Kings and their persons sacred even before they are annointed or crowned yea other kings persons as of Spain Hungary Denmark Sweden Poland c. who are not annointed are as sacred as exempt from danger as those who are enoyled And seeing the annointing of kings is at this day a meer arbitrary humane Ceremony not injoyned by diviâ—e authority nor common to all Kings who are Kings before their Coronations it is most certain and infallible that this enoyling in and of it selfe derives no personall Prerogatives or Immunities at all to kings much lesse an absolute exemption from all actuall resistance in cases of unjust invasions on their Subjects or from the censures of their Parliaments for publike distructive exorbitances as most have hitherto blindly beleeved Neither will the frequent next objected speeches of David concerning Soul Impeach the premises 1 Sam. 24. 6. 10. c. 26. 9. 11. 2. 2 Sam. 1. 12. 16. The Lord forbid that I should do this thing unto my Master the Lords Annointed to stretch forth my hand against him seeing he is the Lords Annointed I will not put forth my hand against my Lord for he he is the Lords annointed And David said to Abishai Destroy him not for who can stretch forth his hand against the Lords Annointed and he guiltlesse The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth his hand against the Lords Annointed The Lord delivered thee into my hand to day but I would not stretch forth mine hand against the Lords Annointed How waâ— thou not afraid to siretch forth thy hand against the Lords Annointed Thy blood shall be upon thy head for thy mouth hath testified that thou hast slain the Lords Annointed Which severall Texts seem at first sight to insinuate that Sauls very externall annointing was that which did secure his person from assauls and violence and that it is unlawfull even by way of defence forcibly with Armes to resist a persecuting unjustly invading king because he is annointed But these Texts if duly pondered will warrant neither of these conclusions First then I answer that Sauls bare annointing considered as an externall Ceremony to declare him a lawfull King did not could not adde any immunity to his person against Davids or any other Subjects just violent resistance as the premised reasons manifest but it was onely his royall Soveraign Office conferred on him by God and the people to which his externall annointing by Samuel was but a preparation That which made Saul with other his successours a king was not his bare annointing For Saul himselfe was annointed by Samuel before he was made and chosen King not when he was made King So David Hazael selu with others were annointed before they were actuall Kings and many of their Successors by descent were reall kings before they were annointed some of them being not annointed at all for ought we read therefore their unction made them not kings since neither simply necessary nor essentiall to their being kings Nor did Sauls annointing only preceding his Regality make his person sacred or any other kings persons for then it would follow That if Saul had not been actually annointed or had continued king for some yeeres without this annointing then David in such a case might lawfully have slain him without check of conscience and that the persons of kings not at all annointed and of hereditary kings before their Coronations till they are annointed should not be sacred nor exempt from violence which is both false and perillous to affirm but it was his Soveraign Royall Authority over David then his Son-in-law Servant Subject which restrained him from offering violence to his person Soul then being thus priviledged not because he was annointed but because he was an annointed king and that not quatenus Annointed but quatenus King the true sense and genuine interpretation of these Texts must be That Sauls person was sacred exempt from his Subjects violence not because he was annointed as if that only did priviledge him but because he was a lawfull king appointed by the Lord himselfe the Lords annointed being but a periphrasis or forme of speech wherein the Geremony of annointing is used for the Regality or kingly power it selfe declared not conferred by annointing and in plain words without any figure it is put for the Lords King that is a King appointed by the Lord in which sence God calls Christ my King and David stiles himselfe x Gods King Sauls Royall Authority without his annointing not his annointing predestinating him to his Authority being the ground of this his immunity from Davids violence Secondly Saul was annointed some space before he was made King and David many yeere before hee came to the Crowne I would then demand of any man if Saul or David after their unction and before their election and inauguration to the Crown had invaded or assaulted any of the people in an hostile manner whether they might not have justly resisted repulsed yea slain them to in their own necessary defence If not then one Subject may not repulse the unjust violence of another in an elective kingdome if by possibility he may after wards be chosen king though for the present he be neither actually king nor Magistrate but a Shepheard as David was Psal 78. 70 71. which I presume none will affirm I am certain none can prove If so then it was not Sauls annointing but onely his Royall Authority which made David thus to spare his life his person So that our Opposites pressing this Argument only from his Annointing is both false and idle as all the premises demonstrate But to set the Argument right I answer thirdly That all which these Texts and Davids example prove is but this That Subjects ought not wilfully or purposely to murder or offer violence to the persons of their kings especially in cold blood when they doe not actually assault them Ergo they may not resist repulse their personall actuall assaults nor oppose their cut-throat Cavaleers when they make an unjust warre against them Which Argument is a meer Non sequitur For 1. Davids example extends only to Sauls own person not to his Souldiers who were neither kings nor Gods Annointed and whom David no doubt would have resisted and slain too had they assaulted him though he spared Saul as Dr. Fern himselfe insinuates in these words Davids Guard that he had about him was onely to secure his person against the cut-throats of Saul if sent to take away his life c. He was annoynted and designed by the Lord to succeed Saul and therefore he might use an extraordinary way of safe-guarding his person Therefore he and his Guard would and might doubtlesse have with a safe conscience resisted repulsed Sauls cut-throat Souldiers had they assaulted David to take
my hand against my Lord for he is the Lords anoynted Moreover my father see yea see the skirt of thy Robe in my hand for in that I cut off the skirt of thy Robe and KILLED THHE NOT know then and see that there is neither evill nor transgression in mine hand and I have not sinned against thee yet then huntest my soul to take it The Lord judge between me thee and the Lord avenge me of thee but mine hand shall not be upon thee and plead my cause and deliver me out of thine hand And after this upon the second advantage he useth like words The Lord render to every man according to his right consnes faithfulnes for the Lord delivered thee into my hand to day but I would not stretch forth my hand against the Lords annointed And behold as THY LIFE WAS MVCH SET BY THIS DAY IN MY EYES so let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord and let him deliver me out of all tribulations Wherein David declared that God had given up Sauls life into his power that it was his owne meer goodnesse that moved him to spare Saul contrary to his Souldiers and Abishaies minds who would have slain him without any seruple of conscience that the reasons he spared him were First because he was Gods Annointed that is specially designed and made King of Israel by Gods own election which no kings at this day are so this reason extends not so fully to them as to Saul Secondly Because he was his Father and Lord too and so it would have been deemed some what an unnaturall act in him Thirdly because it had favoured onely of private self-revenge and ambitious aspiring to the Crown before due time which became not David the quarrell being then not publike but particular betwixt him and David onely who was next to succeed him after his death Fourthly because by this his lenity he would convince reclaim Saul froÌ„ his bloody pursuit and cleare his innocency to the world Fifthly to evidence his dependence upon God and his speciall promise that he should enjoy the Crown after Saul by divine appointment and therefore he would not seem to usurp it by taking Saul life violently away Most of which consideration faile in cases of publike defence and the present controversie Thirdly that Saul himselfe as well as Davids Souldiers conceived that David might with safe conscience have slain as well as spared him witnesse his words 1. Sam. 24. 17 18 19 Thou art more righteous then I for thou hast rewarded me good where as I have rewarded thee evill And thou hast shewedme this day how thou hast deals well with me for asmuch as when the Lord had delivered me into thine hand THOU KILLEDST ME NOT. For if a man finde his enemy WIL HE LET HIM GO WEL AWAY Wherefore the Lord reward three good for that thou hast done unto me this day c. And in 1. Sam. 26. 21. Then said Saul I have sinned returne my sonne David for I will no more do thee harm because my solve was precious in thine eyes this day behold I have played the fool exceedingly c. But the former answers are so satisfactory that I shall not pray in ayd from these much lesse from that evasion of Dr. Fern who makes this and all other Davids demeanors in standing out against Saul EXTRAORDINARY for he was annointed and designed by the Lord to succeed Saul and therefore he might also use all extraordinary wayes of safe guarding his persons which like wise insinuaâ—es that this his scruple of conseience in sparing Sauls life was but extraordinary the rather because all his Souldiers and Abishai would have slain Saul without any such scruple and Saul himselfe conceived that any man else but David would have done it and so by consequence affirms that this his sparing of Saul is no wayes obligatory to other subjects but that they may lawfully in Davids case kill their Soveraigns But Davids resistauce of Saul by a guard of men being only that ordinary way which all subjects in all ages have used in such cases and that which nature teacheth not onely men but all living creatures generally to use for their own defence and this evasion derogating exceedingly from the personall safety of Princes yea and exposing them to such perils as they have cause to con the Dr. small thanks for such a bad invention I shall reject it as the extraordinary fansie of the Dr. other loyalists void both of truth and loyalty The 7. Objection out of the Old Testament is this 1. Sam. 8. 11. Samuel tells the people how they should be oppressed under kings yet all that violence and injustice that should be done unto them is no just cause of resistance for they have NO REMEDY LEFT THEM BVT CRYING TO THE LORD v. 18. And ye shall cry out in that day because of the King which ye shall have chosen you and the Lord will not hear you in that day To this I answer 1. that by the Doctors own confession this text of Samuel much urged by some of his fellows to prove an absolute divine Prerogative in Kings is quite contrary to their suggestion and meant onely of the oppression violence and injuâ— not lawfull power of Kings which should cause them thus to cry out to God This truth we have clearly gained by this objection for which some Royallists will renounce their champion 2. It is but a meer fallacie and absurdity not warranted by the Text which saith not that they shall onely cry out or that they shall use no remedy or resistance but crying out which had been materiall but baâ—ely ye shall cry out in that day c. Ergo they must and should onely crie out and not resist at all is a grosse Non-sequitur which Argument because much cryed up I shall demonstrate the palpable absurdity of it by many parrallell instance First Every Christian is bound to pray for Kings and Magistrates 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. Ergo they must onely pray and not fight for them nor yeeld tribute or obedience to them Kings and their Subjects too are bound to crie out and pray to God against forraign enemies that come to war against them as Moses did against Pharaoh and his Host David against his enemies Hezekiah against Sennacherib and his Hoste Asa against his enemies Abijah and the men of Iudah against Ieroboam and the Israelites their enemies and as all Christians usually do against their enemies Yea I make no doubt but the Doctor and other Court-Chaplains inform his Majesty and the Cavalleers that they must cry to God against the Parliamenteers and Round heads now in Arms to resist them Ergo they must onely pray but in no wise resist or fight against them All men must pray to God for their daily bread Ergo they must onely pray and not labour for it Sick persons
did not ALL ISRAEL upon Solomons death when Rehoboam his son refused to grant their iust requests at their coming to Sechem to make him king use this speech to the king What Portion have we in David neither have we inheritance in the son of lesse to your Tents ô Israel now see to thine own house David Whereupon they departed and fell away from the house of David ever after and made Iereboam King over all Israel And doth not the Text directly affirm Whenefore Rehoboam hearkned not unto the people for the cause was from the Lord that he might perform the saying which the Lord spake to Abijah unto Ieroboam the son of Nebat After which when Rehoboam raised a mighty Army to reduce the ten Tribes to obedience the Word of the Lord came to Shemaiah the man of God saying Speak unto Rehoboam and all the house of Iudah and Benjamin Thus SAITH THE LORD Ye shall not go up to fight against your brethren the children of Israel return every man to his house FOR THIS THING IS FROM ME They hearkned therefore to the word of the Lord and returned to depart according to the word of the Lord. Lo here a Kingdom quite rent a way from the very house of David yea a new King and kingdom erected by the People by Gods and his Prophets speciall direction and approbation for King Solomons Idolatry Who is such a stranger to the sacred Story but hath oft-times read how God anoynted Iehu King of purpose to extirpate and out off the whole house of K. Ahab his Lard for his and Iezabels Idolatry and blood-shed in flaying the Prophets and unjustly executing Naboth for his Vineyard in performance whereof he slew his Soveraign King Ioram Ahaziah King of Iudah Queen Iezabel all Ahabs posterity his great men his Nobles and all the Priests and Worshippers of Baal till he left none remaining according to the word of the Lord which he spake by his servant Elijah 2 Kings c. 9. 10. For which good service the Lord said unto Iehu Because THOV HAST DONE WELL in executing that which is right in mine eyes and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was IN MINE HEART thy children of the 4. generation shall sit on the Thron of Israel This fact therefore of his thus specially commanded approved rewarded by God himself must needs be just and lawfull nor Treason nor Rebellion in Iehu unlesse the Opposites will charge God to be the author approver and rewarder of sin of Treason Neither will it serve their turns to Reply that this was an extraordinary example not to be imitated without such a speciall commission from heaven as Iehu had and no man can now a dayes expect For since God hath frequently injoyned all grosse incorrigible Idolaters especially those who are nearest and dearest to and most potent to seduce us to be put to death without any pitty or exception of Kings whose examples are most pernicious and apt to corrupt the whole Nation as the presidents of the Idolatrous kings of Israel and Iudah abundantly evidence if Kings become open professed Idolaters though private persons may not murther them and their families as Iehu yet the representative body or greater part of their Kingdoms as many Pious Divines affirm may lawfully convent depose if not judge them capitally for it and Gods putting zeal and courage into their hearts or exciting them by his faithfull Ministers to such a proceeding is a sufficient Divine Commission to satisfie Conscience if no sinister private ends but meer zeal of Gods glory and detestation of Idolatry be the onely Motives to such their proceedings Thus we read God stirred up Baacha exalted out of the dust and made him a Prince over the house of Israel who slew king Nadab and smote all the house of Jeroboam till he left him not any that breatned because of the sins of Ieroboam which he sinned and which he made Israel sin by his provocations wherewith he provoked the Lord God of Israel to anger who going on after in Ieroboams sins God threatens to out off all his house and make it like the house of Ieroboam which was actually executed by Zimri who slew his Soveraign King Elah son to Baacha With all the house of Baacha and left not one that pissed against the wall neither of his kinsfolks nor of his friends according to the word of the Lord which he spake against Baacha byâ— â—chu the Prophet Which act of Zimri though a just judgement in regard of God on the family of Baacha for their Idolatry was notwithstanding reputed Treason in Zimri because he did it not out of Conscience or zeal against Idolatry being and continuing an Idolater himself but onely out of ambition to usurp the Crown without the peeples consent whereupon all the people made Omri King and then going all to the Royall Palace set it on fire and burnt Omri in it both for his sins Idolatries and Treason which he wrought We read expresly that after the time that Amaziah did turn away from following the Lord they for this conspired a conspiracie against him in Ierusalem and he fled to Lachish but they sent to Lachish after him slew him there and they brought him upon horses and buried him with his fathers in the City of Iudah Then all the people of Iudah took Uzziah who was 16 years old and MADE HIM KING in the room of his father Amaziah and he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord. So Zachariah Shallum Pekahiah Pekah four evill Kings of Iudah successivly acquiring the Crown by murther and reigning evilly in Gods fight were all slain by Gods just judgement on them of one another and Hoshea In few words God himself ever annexed this condition to the Kings of Israel and Iudah that they should serve and fear him obey him Laws keep his Covenant otherwise if they did wickedly for sake him or commit idolatry he would destroy forsake and cast them and their seed off from being Kings When therefore they apparently violated the condition the whole State and people as Gods Instruments lawfully might and sometimes did by Gods speciall direction remov depose and sometimes put them even to death for their grosse iniquities and idolatries and when they did it not it was not as many think for want of lawfull Soveraign Authority remaining in the whole State and people as I shall fully manifest in the Appendix but out of a defect of zeal out of a generall complying with their Kings in their abominable idolatries and sins which brought War Captivity ruine both on their Kings their Posteritie the whole Nation and Kingdoms of Iudah and Israel as the Sacred Story plentifully relates All which considere this object on proves not onely false but fatall to the Obiectors cause who might with more discretion have forborn then forced such an answer to it which I hope and desire
their cruelties oppressions impieties Seventhly the Apostle hereupon concludes Vers 5. Wherefore you must of necessity be subject not onely for wrath but also for conscience sake This conclusion as the word Wherefore demonstrates being inferred from the premised reasons extending onely to extends to all civill Magistrates as well inferiour and subordinate as superiour and many sticke not to straine it even to Ecclesiasticall ones So Origen Ambrose Hierome Remigius Theodulus Chrysostome Theodoret Primasius Haymo Rabanus Maurus Theophylact Oecumenius Haymo Aquinas Anselm Lyra Bruno Gorran Hugo de Sancto Victore Tostatus Luther Calvin Erasmus Melanchthon Gualther Musculus Bucer Hemingius Ferus Fayus Soto Alexander Alesius Peter Martyr Pareus Beza Piscator Zuinglius Tollet Willet Wilson Nacclantus Snecanus Vignerius Wenerichius Winckelman Estius Faber Cornelius a Lapide Salmeron Catharinus Guilliandus Adam Sasbout with sundry others This then being irrefragable hereby it is most apparent First that no resistance of the higher powers is here prohibited but onely in the due and legall execution of their offices For if any inferiour Officers illegally indeavour to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties and unrightly governe the people they may lawfully be resisted by them For example if a Maior Justice of Peace Constable or other officer extravagating from the common course of Law and Justice shall with force of armes in a riotous manner assault any private man or the whole Citie or Village where he lives to beate wound kill plunder dispossesse the inhabitants of their houses goods franchises or assault them on the highway side to take away their purses in these and such like cases both in point of Law and conscience he may not onely be forcibly resisted but repulsed apprehended battered if not lawfully slaine by the people and proceeded against as a delinquent The reason is because these illegall unjust actions are not onely besides without their Commissions but directly contrary to their offices and the Lawes which never gave them authority to act such injustice yet they are higher Powers ordained of God within this Text and no way to be resisted in the due execution of their Offices according to Law If then these inferiour Officers may be thus forcibly resisted repulsed notwithstanding this Text in such cases as these then by the selfe same reason Kings and Emperours may bee thus resisted too since the Text extends indifferently to them both Let then the objectors take their choyce either affirme that no inferiour lawfull Officers whatsoever may be forcibly resisted by the people or repulsed arraigned censured for their misdemeanour by vertue of this Text which would bring an absolute Tyranny Anarchy and confusion presently into the world and make every Constable as great a Tyrant Monarch as the grand Emperor of the Turks or else confesse that this Text condemnes not such resistance even of Kings and Princes when they forcibly war upon their Subjects to subvert Religion Lawes Liberties and ruine the republike since it makes no distinction at all betweene the ones power and the others but equally enjoynes subjection prohibits resistance unto both and that onely in just administration of their severall authorities not in the arbitrary unjust prosecutions of their wils and lusts Secondly it followes that the Kings Souldiers Cavaliers and Forces now raised against Law and armed onely with illegall Commissions voyd in Law as I have proved are none of the high powers ordained of God nor lawfull Rulers or Magistrates within the meaning of this Scripture and so the forcible resisting of them and of the Kings illegall commands and designes executed by them is no resistance of the higher powers here prohibited Thirdly that the Houses of Parliament being in truth the highest powers ordained of God in this Realme and their just legall Ordinances Votes Forces for the necessary defence of Lawes Liberties Religion against the Kings ill Counsellors and Malignant Popish Forces neither may nor ought in conscience to be resisted by the King himselfe or any of his Subjects Souldiers under the perill of that damnation mentioned in this Chapter For the second Whether the Roman Emperor in Pauls time was the highest Soveraign power in the Roman State or not It is taken for granted by Doctor Ferne and other opposites that he was as a thing past doubt the Senate and people as they say having resigned up their power to the Emperour But this no doubt is a grosse errour which I have largely refuted in the Appendix and therefore shall be the briefer here derived from some civill Lawyers who out of Justinian Digest lib. 2. Tet. 2. and Instit Tit. 2. falsly affirme that Lege Regia by the regall Law the Senate and people transferred all their Empire and power unto the Emperour For first the Senate and people as Albericus Gentilis well observes did not by this Law give the Emperour all power and command to dispose of them or the lands and revenues of the Empire as he pleased but onely to governe them according to their Lawes as men not to slay and alienate them as beasts Thus reason dictates so the words of the Law sound Divines are deceived Lawyers flatter who perswade that all things are lawfull to Princes and that their power is highest and free It is ridiculous to affirme that absolute power over the subjects belongs to Popes which belongs not to the Emperours themselves over the Italians from whom they derive it Imagine therefore that the Emperour had a power never so free yet it is not of dominion but of administration And he who hath but a free administration hath not the power of donation e A gardian is then reputed in stead of a Lord cum tutelam administrat non cum pupillum spoliat when he rightly administers his tutelage not when he spoyles his pupill So Gentilis If then the Emperours had onely a free legall administration not an absolute dominion granted them by the people then this soveraigne power still resided in the Senate and people as Justinian Digest lib. 1. Tit. 2. De Origine Juris will sufficiently manifest Secondly John Bodin a learned Civilian clearely proves That the Roman Emperors were at the first nothing else but Princes of the Commonweale The SOVERAIGNTY NEVERTHELESSE STILL RESTING IN THE PEOPLE and THE SENATE So that this Common-wealth was then to have beene called a Principality although that Seneca speaking in the person of Nero his Scholler saith I am the onely man amongst living men elect and chosen to be the Lieutenant of God upon earth I am the Arbitratour of life and death I am able of my pleasure to dispose of the state and quality of every man True it is that he tooke upon him this Soveraigne authority by force wrested from the people and Senate of Rome therefore not freely given him by any Law but IN RIGHT HE HAD IT NOT the State being but a very principalitie WHEREIN THE PEOPLE HAD THE SOVERAIGNTY In which case THERE IS
and fight with this their weapon That it is unlawfull for Christians to fight or make so much as a defensive warre against invading Forraign barbarous Enemies of whom this Father speaks And then if the Irish Rebels Danes Spaniards French should now invade England both against the Kings and Kingdoms Wills we must make no forcible resistance at all against them with Arms in point of conscience but onely use prayers and teares This is the uttermost conclusion which can properly be hence deduced which our Antagonists will confesse to be at least erronious Anabaptisticall if not Hereticall Secondly You must consider who it was that used this speech Ambrose a Minister then Bishop of Millain who by reason of this his function being an Ambassadour of Peace had his hands bound from fighting with any other weapons even against invading forraign Enemies but only with the sword of the spirit prayers and tears and that his calling only was the ground of this his speech is infallible by the latter clause thereof which our Opposites cunningly conceale Prayers are my Armes For such are the Defensive Armour OF PRIESTS Otherwise I NEITHER OVGHT NOR CAN RESIST Why so Because he was a Minister a Bishop and Paul prohibites such to be STRIKERS Tit. 1. 7. 1 Tim. 3. 3. and because Priests under the Law did but blow the Trumpets and never went out armed to the warres Josh 6. Upon which ground Divers Councells Decretalls Canonists expresly prohibit and exempt Priests and Bishops from bearing Arms or going to Warre though many of them have turned great Souldiers and been slain in warres Hence Anno 1267 in a Parliament held at Bury K. H. 3 d. and Ottobon the Popes Legat demanded of all the Bishops and Clergy men holding Barronies or Lay-fees that they should go personally armed against the Kings enemies or finde so great service in the Kings expedition as appertained to so much Lands and Tenants To which they answered That THEY OUGHT NOT TO FIGHT WITH THE MATERIALL SWORD no not against the Kings Enemies But with the spirituall to wit with humble and devoute tears and prayers using these words of Ambrose And that for their benefices they were bound to maintain Peace NOT WARRE Hence our King Richard the first taking the Bishop of Beauvoyes in France his great Enemy armed from top to toe prisoner in the field commanded him to be strictly kept in prison in his arms and would by no means suffer him to put them off for which hard usuage he complained to the Pope and procured his letter to King Richard to free him from his arms and restraint in which Letter the Pope sharply reproves the Bishop for preferring the secular warfare before the spirituall in that he had taken a Speare insteed of a Crosier an Helmet in liew of a Miter an Habergion insteed of a white Rochet a Target in place of a Stole an Iron-sword insteed of a spirituall sword After which the King sent his Arms with this Message to the Pope See whether this be thy sonnes Coat or not Which the Pope beholding answered No by Saint Peter It is neither the apparell of my sonnes nor yet of my Brethren but rather the vesture of the sonnes of Mars And upon this ground Our Bishops anciently when Members of Parliament departed the house when Cases of Treason or Felony came in question because they might not by the Canons have their hands in bloud This then being Ambrose his direct words and meaning That he neither ought nor could use any other Weapons against the invading Gothes and their forces but prayers and tears because he was a Minister not a Bishop a Lay-man The genvine Argument that our opposites can thence extract is but this Priests must use no other Defensive Arms but prayers and tears against invading forraign Enemies Ergo The Priests and Ministers in his Majesties Armies who bear Offensive Arms must now in conscience lay them down and use no other resistance but prayers and tears against the Parliaments forces where as their former inference against resistance Ergo It is altogether unlawfull for the Parliament or any Lay-Subjects by their command to defend Religion Laws Liberties against his Majesties invading forces who intend by force to subvert them is but ridiculous nonsence which never once entred into this Fathers thoughts and can never be extorted from his words Ministers of the Gospel must not use any Arms but prayers and tears to resist a forraigne Enemy Ergo None else may lawfully use them to withstand an invading adversary Is a conclusion fitter for Anabaptists then Royallists who may now with shame enough for ever bid this authority adieu with which they have hitherto gulled the ignorant World And henceforth turn it against the Commission of Array enjoyning Bishops and Clergy men to array and arme themselves as well as other men as the Presidents cited in Judge Cooke his Argument against Ship-money in the Parliaments two Declarations against the Commission of Array and in the Answer published in the Kings name to the first of them plentifully evidence Finally Hence I infer That Clergy men may and must fight against their invading Enemies with prayers tears the Weapons which they may lawfully use as proper for their callings Ergo Lay-men may and must resist and fight against them with corporall Arms since they are as proper for them in cases of needfull defence as these spirituall Arms are for Priests The second Authority is that of Nazienzen Oratio 2. in Julianum Repressus of Julianus Christianorum lachrymis quas multas multi profuderunt HOC VNVM or Solum as Grotius translates it adversus persecutionem medicamentum habentes To which I shall adde by way of supply this other passage Nos autem quibus NVLLA ALIA ARMA nec muri nec praesidia praeter spem in Deum reliqua erant Vtpote OMNI HVMANO SVBSIDIO PRORSVS DESTITVTIS ET SPOLIATIS quem tandem alium aut precum auditorem aut inimicorum depulsorem habituri eramus quam Deum Jacob qui adversus superbiam jurat From whence they conclude that Christians must use no other weapons but prayers and tears against Tyrants and oppressors To which I answer First that it is cleare by this that Christians may use prayers and teares against Tyrants and oppressors Secondly that these are the most powerfull prevailing Armes both to resist and conquer them This the opposites readily grant Therefore by their own confession Christians both may and must resist tyrants by the most powerful effectual means that are Tyrants therefore are not the higher Powers Kings Rulers which Paul and Peter in the fore-objected texts enjoyne men under paine of damnation to be subject and obedient to for conscience sake and no waies to resist since they may resist them with the powerfullest armes of all others prayers and teares Thirdly if they may be lawfully resisted with these most prevailing armes notwithstanding
defensive Arms by subjects in certains cases Sleidan Hist lib. 8. 18. 22. David Chrytraus Chron. Saxoniae l. 13. p. 376. Richardus Dinothus de Bello Civili Gallico Religionis caeusasuscepto p. 231. 232. 225. 227 c. A book intituled De Iure Belli Belgici Hagae 1599. purposely justifying the lawfulnesse of the Low-countries defensive war Emanuel Meteranus Historia Belgica Praefat. lib. 1 to 17. David Paraeus Com. in Rom. 13. Dub. 8. And. Quaest Theolog. 61. Edward Grimston his Generall History of the Netherlands l. 5. to 17. passim Hugo Grotius de Iure Belli Pacis lib. 1. cap. 4. with sundry other forraign Protestant writers both in Germany France Bohemia the Netherlands and elsewhere Iohu Knokes his Appellation p. 28. to 31. George Bucanon De Iure Regni apud Scotos with many Scottish Pamphlets justifying their late wars Ioh. Ponet once B. of Winchester his Book intituled Politick Govern p. 16. to 51. Alber. Gentilis de Iur. Belli l. 1. c. 25. l. 3. c. 9. 22. M. Goodmans Book in Q. Ma. dayes intituled How superior Magistrates ought to be obeyed c. 9. 13. 14. 16. D. A. Willet his Sixfold Commentary on Romanes 13. Quaestion 16. Controversie 3. p. 588 589 590 608 c. Peter Martyr Com In Rom. 13 p. 1026. with sundry late writers common in every mans hands iustifying the lawfulnesse of the present defensive War whose Names I spare And lest any should think that none but Puritanes have maintained this opinion K. Iames himself in his Answer to Card. Perron iustifieth the French Protestant taking up Defensive Arms in France And Bish Bilson a fierce Antipuritane not onely defends the Lawfulnesse of the Protestants defensive Arms against their Soveraign in Germany Flaunders Scotland France but likewise dogmatically determines in these words Neither will I rashly pronounce all that resist to be Rebels Cases may fall out even in Christian Kingdoms where the people may plead their right against the Prince AND NOT BE CHARGED WITH REBELLION As wherefor example If a Prince should go about to subject his People to a forreign Realm or change the form of the Common-wealth from Impery to Tyrannie or neglect the Laws established by Common consent of Prince and people to execute his own pleasure In these and other caeses which might be named IF THE NOBILITY AND COMMONS IOYN TOGETHER TO DEFEND THEIR ANCIENT AND ACCVSTOMED LIBERTY REGIMENT AND LAWS THEY MAY NOT WELL BE COVNTED REBELS I never denied but that the People might preserve the foundation freedom and forme of the Common-wealth which they fore prised when they first consented to have a King As I said then so I say now The Law of God giveth no man leave but I never said that Kingdoms and Common-wealths might not proportion their States as they thought best by their publike Laws which afterward the Princes themselves may not violate By supertour Powers ordained of God Rom. 13. we understand not onely Princes BVT ALL POLITIKE STATES AND REGIMENTS somewhere the People somewhere the Nobles having the same interest to the sword that Princes have to their Kingdoms and in Kingdoms where Princes bear rule by the sword we do not mean THE PRIVATE PRINCES WILL AGAINST HIS LAWS BVT HIS PRECEPT DERIVED FROM HIS LAWES AND AGREEING WITH HIS LAWES Which though it be wicked yet may it not be resisted of any subject when derived from and agreeing with the Laws with armed violence Marry when Princes offer their Subjects not Iustice but force and despise all Laws to practise their lusts not every nor any private man may take the sword to redresse the Prince but if the Laws of the Land appoint the Nobles as next to the King to assist him in doing right and withhold him from doing wrong THEN BE THEY LICENCED BY MANS LAW AND NOT PROHIBITED BY GODS to interpose themselves for safeguard of equity and innoceucy and by all lawfull AND NEEDFVLL MEANS TO PROCVRE THE PRINCE TO BE RE FORMED but in no case deprived where the Scepter is Hereditary So this learned Bishop determines in his authorized Book dedicated to Queen Elizabeth point-blank against our Novell Court-Doctors and Royallists But that which swayes most with me is not the opinions of private men byassed oft-times with private sinister ends which corrupt their judgements as I dare say most of our Opposites in this controversie have writ to flatter Princes to gain or retain promotions c. But the generall universall opinion and practice of all Kingdoms Nations in the world from time to time Never was there any State or Kingdom under heaven from the beginning of the world till now that held or resolved it to be unlawfull in point of Law or Coscience to resist with force of Arms the Tyranny of their Emperours Kings Princes especially when they openly made war or exercised violence against them to subvert their Religion Laws Liberties State Government If ever there were any Kingdom State People of this opinion or which forbore to take up Arms against their Tyrannous Princes in such cases even for conscience sake I desire our Antagonists to name them for though I have diligently searched inquired after such I could never yet finde or hear of them in the world but on the contrary I finde all Nations States Kingdoms whatsoever whether Pagan or Christian Protestant or Popish ancient or modern unanimously concurring both in iudgement and constant practice that forcible resistance in such cases is both iust lawfull necessary yea a duty to be undertaken by the generall consent of the whole Kingdom State Nation though with the effusion of much blood and hazard of many mens lives This was the constant practise of the Romans Grecians Gothes Moors Indians AEgyptians Vandals Spaniards French Britains Saxons Italians English Scots Bohemians Polonians Hungarians Danes Swedes Iews Flemmins and other Nations in former and late ages against their Tyrannicall oppressing Emperors Kings Princes together with the late defensive Wars of the protestants in Germany Bohemia France Swethland the Low-countries Scotland and elsewhere against their Princes approved by Queen Elizabeth king Iames and our present king Charles who assisted the French Bohemians Dutch and German Protestant Princes in those Wars with the unanimous consent of their Parliaments Clergy people abundantly evidence beyond all contradiction which I have more particularly manifested at large in my Appendix and therefore shall not enlarge my self further in it here onely I shall acquaint you with these five Particulars First that in the Germanes Defensive Wars for Religion in Luthers dayes the Duke of Saxonie the Lantzgrave of Hesse the Magistrates of Magdeburge together with other Protestant Princes States Lawyers Cities Counsellors and Ministers after serious consultation coneluded and resolved That the Laws of the Empire permitted resistance of the Emperour to the Princes and Subjects in some cases that defence of Religion and Liberties then invaded was one of these caeses that the times were
would favour and bring to a good end SO HOLY AND NECESSARY AN ENTERPRIZE This their defensive Warre yet continuing hath been justified by many and in speciall maintained to be just and honorable BOTH IN LAW AND CONSCIENCE in a particular Book De jure Belli Belgici printed at the Hague with the States approbation 1599. to which I shall referre you Fifthly which comes neerest to our present case of any story I have met with Alphonso the 3. king of Arragon in the year 1286. through the ill advise of some bad Counsellors and Courtiers about him departed in discontent from the Parliament of the Estates of Arragon then assembled at Saragossa and posted to Osca because the Parliaments took upon them to make Lawes to reforme and order his Court his Courtiers which he denyed but they affirmed they had just right and power to doe Hereupon the businesse being put unto greater difficulty the Estates affirmed A Comitiis intempestive discedere Regi NEFAS ESSE That IT WAS A WICKED ACT FOR THE KING THVS VNSEASONABLY TO DEPART FROM THE PARLIAMENT NEITHER WAS SO GREAT A BREACH OF THEIR PRIVILEDGES AND RIGHTS TO BE PATIENTLY ENDVRED Whereupon they presently raised up the Name and FORCES OF THE VNION or Association formerly made and entred into between the Nobility Cities and people mutually to aid and assist one another to preserve the Peace and Liberties of the Realm even with force of Armes IT BEING LAWFVLL for the common cause of Liberty Non Verbis solum SED ARMIS QVOQVE CONTENDERE not onely TO CONTEND with words BVT ALSO WITH ARMES Vpon this king Alphonso desirous to prevent the mischiefs them present and incumbent by advise of his Privy Counsell published certaine good Edicts at Osca for regulating his Court Counsell Iudges Officers by which he thought to have ended all this Controversie but because they were promulged onely by the Kings own Edict not by the whole Parliament as binding Lawes they still proceeded in the Vnion till at last after various events of things this King returning to the Generall Assembly and Parliament of the Estates at Saragossa in the year 1287 condessended to their desires and confirmed the two memorable priviledges of the Vnion with the Soveraign power of the Iustice of Aragon which could controll their very Kings Of which see more in the Appendix I shall close up this of the lawfulnesse of a necessary defensive warre with the speech of the Emperour Alexander Seuerus recorded by Herodian l. 5. He who first infers injuries hath no probable colour but he that repulseth those who are troublesome to him EX BONA CONSCENTIA sumit fiduciam assumes confidence FROM A GOOD CONSCIENCE and good hope of successe is present with him from hence that he offers not injury but removes it Thus have I now at last waded thorow this weighty controversie of the lawfulnesse both in point of Law and Conscience of the Parliaments present and all other subjects necessary Defensive Warres against their Soveraigns who invade their lawes liberties Religion Government to subvert them by open force of Armes in which I have freely and impartially discharged my conscience not out of any turbulent seditious or disloyall intention to forment or perpetuate the present or raise any future destructive unnaturall warres between king Parliament and People or to countenance to encourage any tumultuous rebellious factious ambitious traiterous spirits to mutiny or rebell against their Soveraigns for private injuries or upon any false unwarrantable ends or pretences whatsoever let Gods curse and mens for ever rest upon all those who are in love with any warre especially a Civill within their own dearest Countries bowels or dare abuse my loyall sincere Lucubrations to any disloyall sinister designes to the prejudice of their Soveraignes or the States wherein they live but only out of a cordiall desire to effect such a speedy honourable safe religious semplternall peace between king and Parliament as all true Christian English hearts both cordially pray long for and endeavour by informing his seduced Majesty his evill Counsellors his Popish Malignant Forces that if they will still proceed unnaturally and treacherously to make war against their Native Countrey Religion Lawes Liberties and the Parliament which to doe I have elsewhere manifested to be no lesse then high Treason Rebellion against both King and Kingdome they may in point of conscience and Law too be justly opposed resisted repulsed even by force of Armes without any guilt of Treason Rebellion or feare of temporall or eternall condemnation as publike Enemies Rebels Traytors to the Realm whatevever they have hitherto been informed of to the contrary by temporizing Lawyers or flattering illiterate Court Divines and by assuring all such noble generous publike spirits who shall willingly adventure their lives or fortunes by the Parliaments command in the present necessary defensive warre for the ends premised that for this good service they shall neither in the Courts of Law nor Conscience incurre the least stain or guilt of Treason Rebellion sedition or any such like odious crime much lesse eternall condemnation the panick feare whereof frequently denounced against them by many sottish Malignants Royalists ill-instructed Lawyers and Theologasters hath frighted kept back and withdrawn multitudes from yea cooled corrupted many in this honourable publike duty service which they now owe of Right to God and their Countrey in which to be treacherous perfidious sloathfull negligent cold uncordiall or timerous as too many hitherto have been to the greater honour of those who haue been faithfull actiue Valiant and sincere especially now after so many late horrid treacheries most happily discouered and a new Couenant solemnly entred into demerits a perpetuall brand of infamy and reproach To dye fighting for ones dearest bleeding dying Countrey hath in all ages been honoured with a Crown of Martyrdome to liue or dye fighting against it hath ever deserved the most capitall censures ignominies and heaviest execrations Let both sides therefore now seriously ponder and lay all the premises close to their soules consciences and then I doubt not through Gods blessing but a happy peace will speedily thereon ensue Nation shall not lift up sword against Nation Countrey against Countrey Englishman against Englishman Brother against brother any more as now they doe neither shall they learn such an unnaturaall cursed kind of Civill Warre any more but beat their swords into Plow-shares and their speares into pruning hooks and greet one another with a kisse of holy peace and charity Which desired end and issue of these present bloudy warres God in his mercy hasten and accomplish to the joy of all our Soules I should now according to former engagements proceed to other remaining particulars but because this part hath already farre exceeded its intended bounds out of a desire to give full satisfaction in a point of highest present and future concernment every way I shall reserve the residue with the Appendix for another