II. PART Soul in the body, one master in a family, one sun in the heaven, and anciently one monarch in each society. All the first governors were kings. Both forms are warranted by the law of nature, but not both in the same degree of eminency. If an old man had the eye of a young man, he would see as well as a young man (said the philosopher). The soul of an idiot is as rational as the soul of a statesman; the difference is in the organ. So the soul of sovereign power, which is infused by God into democracy or aristocracy, is the same that it is in monarchy; but seeing the organ is not so apt to attain to the end, and seeing that God and nature do always intend what is best, and, lastly, seeing that in some cases the existence of government as well as the essence is from God, Who never instituted any form but monarchical, the Observer might well have omitted his comparison. [4. Usurped domi nion not in the same heredit ary.] The fourth and last error is worst of all,-"that usurped and unjust dominion is referred to God as its author and from God donor, as much as hereditary." This is downright. We sense as is have been taught otherwise, before a few vain upstart empirics in policy troubled the world;-that dominion in a tyrannical hereditary governor is from God even in the concrete (I mean the power, not the abuse); that such an one may not be resisted without sin; that his person is sacred; but, contrarywise, that dominion in a tyrannical usurper or intruder is indeed from God permitting, whereas He could restrain it, if it pleased Him; or from God concurring by a general influence, as the earth giveth nourishment to hem[Acts xvii. locks as well as wheat,-" In Him we live, we move, and 28.] have our being;" or from God ordering and disposing it, as He doth all other accidents and events, to His own glory; but that it is not from God as author, donor, or instituter of it. Neither dare we give to a tyrannical usurper the essential privileges of sovereignty; we deny not, that any subject may lawfully kill him as a public enemy without legal eviction. Much less dare we say with the Observer, that power usurped and unlawful is as much from God as power hereditary and lawful. If it be so, cough out, man, and tell us plainly, that God is the author of sin. SECTION THE THIRD. Observ." And the law which the king mentioneth, is not to be understood to be any special ordinance sent from Heaven by the ministry of Angels or Prophets, as amongst the Jews it sometimes was. It can be nothing else among Christians, but the pactions and agreements of such and such [politique] corporations"." DISCOURSE 11. explained.] Answ. There is a double right considerable; the right to [Right of the crown, and the right of the crown. The right and title the crown to the crown is with us undoubted: there needs no Angel from Heaven to confirm it, where no man can pretend against it. The right of the crown is the only subject in question. This is from the law of God, the law of nature, and the law of nations. That this power in an absolute conqueror may be limited by statutes, charters, or municipal laws, in court of conscience, in court of justice, to God, to His people, I grant (without communicating sovereign power to subordinate or inferior subjects, or subjecting majesty to censure): which limitation doth not proceed from mutual pactions, but from acts of grace and bounty. I would know to what purpose the Observer urgeth this distinction of laws. Will it alter the state of the question, or the obligation of subjects? Nothing less. Whether the calling of the prince be ordinary or extraordinary, mediate or immediate, the title of the prince, the tie of the subject, is still the same. Those ministers who were immediately ordained by Christ or His Apostles, did far exceed ours in personal perfections; but as for the ministerial power, no tract of time can bring the least diminution to it. God was the first instituter of marriage; yet He never brought any couple together but Adam and Eve; other marriages are made by free election: yet, for as much as it is made by virtue and in pursuance of Divine institution, we do not doubt to say, and truly, "those whom God hath [Marriage joined together." His Majesty's title is as strong, the obli- Service.] gation and relation between him and his subjects is the very 529 same, as if God should say from Heaven, Take this man to be b [Observations &c., p. 1.] PART 1 Sam. viii. 5. your king. Again, if the liberty of the subject be from grace, not from pactions or agreements, is it therefore the less? or the less to be regarded? What is freer than gift? If a nobleman shall give his servant a farm, to pay a rose or peppercorn for an acknowledgment, his title is as strong as if he bought it with his money. But the Observer deals with his Majesty, as some others do with God Almighty in point of merit; they will not take Heaven as a free gift, but challenge it as purchasers. In a word, the author of these Observations would insinuate some difference betwixt our kings and the kings of Israel, or some of them who had immediate vocation; wherein he would deceive us, or deceiveth himself; for their request to Samuel was, "Make us a king to judge us like all other nations." SECTION THE FOURTH. Observ." Power is originally inherent in the people; and it is nothing else but that might and vigour, which such or such a society of men contains in itself: and when by such or such a law, of common consent and agreement, it is derived into such and such hands, God confirms that law: and so man is the free and voluntary author, the law is the instrument, and God is the establisher of both. And we see, not that prince which is most potent over his subjects, but that prince which is most potent in his subjects, is indeed most truly potent; for a king of one small city, if he be entrusted with a large prerogative, may be said to be more potent over his subjects, than a king of many great regions, whose prerogative is more limited: and yet, in true reality of power, that king is most great and glorious, which hath the most and strongest subjects, and not he which tramples upon the most contemptible vassals. This is therefore a great and fond error in some princes, to strive more to be great over their people than in their people, and to eclipse themselves by impoverishing, rather than to magnify themselves by enfranchising, their subjects. This we see in France at this day; for were the peasants there more free, they would be more rich and magnanimous; and were they so, their king were more puissant; but now, by affecting an II. adulterate power over his subjects, the king there loses a DISCOURSE true power in his subjects, embracing a cloud instead of Junoc." inherent in vourite the Ob Answ. It hath ever been the wisdom of governors, to [1. Power conceal from the promiscuous multitude its own strength; the peoand that rather for the behoof of themselves than of their ple, a farulers. Those beasts which are of a gentle and tractable doctrine of disposition, live sociably among themselves, and are cherished servator's friends.] by man; whereas those that are of a more wild and untameable nature, live in continual persecution and fear of others, of themselves. But of late it is become the masterpiece of our modern incendiaries, to magnify the power of the people, to break open this cabinet of state, to prick forward the heady and raging multitude with fictitious devices of 'bulls and minotaurs.' And all this with as much sincerity as Corah, Dathan, and Abiram said to Moses and Aaron, "You take too much on you, seeing all the congregation are Numb, xvi. holy." I desire the Observer, at his leisure, to read Plato's description of an Athenian sophisterd; and he shall find himself personated to the life, that one egg is not liker another; if the coat fit him, let him put it on. The Scripture phraseth this to be "troubling" of a Church, or of a state: 1 Kings it is a metaphor taken from a vessel wherein is liquor of and Gal. several parts, some more thick, others more subtle, which by v. [10.] shaking together is disordered, and the dregs and residence is lifted up from the bottom to the top. The Observer hath learned how to take eels; it is their own rule, they that would alter the government, must first "trouble" the state. 3, 10. xviii. 17, it were in them ori compact seded the Secondly, 'posito sed non concesso'-admitting but not [2. Though granting, that power is originally inherent in the people, herent in what is this to us, who have an excellent form of govern- ginally, yet ment established, and have divested ourselves of this power? with us Can we play fast and loose, and resume it again at our plea- has supersure? Lesbia was free to choose herself a husband when original she was a maid; may she therefore do it when she is a wife? right.] Admitting that his Majesty were elected in his predecessors, yea, or in his own person for him and his heirs, is this power therefore either the less absolute or less perpetual? Admit[Observations, &c., pp. 1, 2.] d Plato, De Republ., lib. vi. [c. 7.] II. PART ting that before election we had power to covenant, yea, or condition, by what laws we would be governed, had we therefore power to condition that they should be no longer laws than they listed us? This were to make our sovereign, not a great and glorious king, but a plain Christmas lord. Or have 530 we therefore power still to raise arms to alter the laws by force, without sovereign authority? This seems to be the Observer's main scope, but the conclusion is so odious (as which hath ever been confessed treason), and the consequence so miserably weak, that he is glad to deal altogether enthymematically. [3. Power not from the people.] John xix. 11. [4. Powerful and du a powerful prince.] Thirdly, admitting and granting, that the last exercise or execution of power, that is, the 'posse comitatus' or 'regni,' is in the people, is the right also in the people or from the people? Excuse us, if we rather give credit to our Saviour, "Thou couldest have no power at all against Me, except it were given thee from above." If Pilate had his power from Heaven, we may conclude strongly for King Charles. Nil dat quod non habet. Some power the people 'qua talis' never had; as power of life and death; it is the peculiar right of God and His vicegerents. Put the case, the king grants to a corporation such and such magistrates, with power also to them to elect new magistrates (which yet holds but sometimes), from whom do those magistrates hold their power? Not from the people, who elect them, but from the king, who creates them. Fourthly, you tell us, that the power of a king is to have tiful sub- powerful subjects; and to be powerful in his subjects, not to jects make be powerful over his subjects. Your reason halts, because it wants a 'cæteris paribus.' Several kings may have several advantages of greatness. The truth is, neither many powerful subjects without obedience, nor forced obedience without powerful and loving subjects, do make a great and glorious king; but the concatenation of superiors and inferiors in the adamantine bonds of love and duty. When subjects are affected, as Scillurus would have his sons for concorde, as Scipio had his soldiers for obedience', which they prized above their lives, being ready to throw themselves from a e [Plut., De Garrul., § 17, Op. Moral., tom. iii. p. 41. ed. Wyttenb.] [Id., Apophth. Reg. &c., Scip. Min. num. 16, ibid. tom. i. p. 559.] |