HERE you beginne, that other conditions are re­quisite for comming to gouernement by successi­on, besides propinquitie or prioritie of bloude; which conditions must be limited by some higher authoritie then that of the King, and yet are they prescribed by no law of Nature or deuine. For o­therwise, one that wanteth his wits or sences, or is a Turke in religion, might succeed in gouernment; which you affirme to be against al reason, law, reli­gion, wisdom, cōsciēce, & against the first end of In­stitutiō of cōmō wealths. And that Byllay, who main­taineth the contrarie, doth it in fauour and flattery of some particular Prince.

[Page]What cōditiōs are requisit in succession besides pri­ority of bloud, & by what authority they are to be li­mited, I w [...]l thē examin whē you shal propoūd: but for your reason of this assertiō, you must heaue other men thē Billay out of credit, for reason, law, cōsciēce, & wisdom, before you cary it for cleare good. As for entire cōtrariety in religion, or differēce in some par­ticular points therof, whether it be a sufficient cause of exclusion, or no, I wil refer my selfe to that place, where you do strain your strength about it. In disabi­lities to gouern, Baldus In c. 1. tit. de success. feud.doth distinguish, whether it be naturall, or accidentall; affirming, that in the first case it sufficeth to exclude, because he that is incapa­ble of gouernmēt frō his birth, had neuer any right of successiō setled in him: in the other it doth not suf­fice; because he that is once inuested in right of suc­cession, cānot be depriued therof without his fault. Many do follow this distinction; Io: Igneus In quaest [...]an rex Franc ae r [...]c [...]g­n s [...]at [...]uperio­rem.doth limit it, to such dignities as are not absolute: But I [...]son In [...]emo. D. d [...] l [...]g 1., Angelus In [...]ū praetor. § non autem. D. de Iudi. & diuers others do indistinctly hold, that the eldest son of a king or other gouernor, although he be borne either [...]urious, or a foole, or otherwise de­fectiue, cānot therfore be excluded frō his successiō. These affirm, that any end of institution of common wealths is, if not fully, yet better satisfied, by appoin­ting a protector of the state (as vpō diuers occasions it hath bin vsuall) then by acknowledging another prince; as wel for other respects, as for that by conti­nuāce of succession in one discent, a faire & ordinary occasion is remoued, both of mutiny & inuasion. For enemies wil not readily attempt, & subiects do most willingly obey that prince, whose ancesters haue worn out those humors both of hatred & contempt [Page] which do commonly accompany new raised estates. I wil not confirm this last opinion, by the exāple of Neptune the son of Saturn; who, althogh he was lame on both his legs, yet had the gouernment of the sea allotted to him: but I wil cōfirm it by the practise of Athens & Laced [...]mon, the two eyes of Graecia, as Lepti­nes A pud Aristor. thetor. 3. ca. 10.& Iustine Lib. 5.do aptly term thē. Herodotu: In cerpsychorereporteth that whē Alexandrides king of Sparta left 2, sons, Cleo­menes the eldest, distracted in wits, & Dorieus the yongest, both of ability & inclination to all actions of honor, the Lacedaemoniās acknoledged Cleomenes for their king. Agesilaus also the famous king of Lacedae­mon was lame, as Plutarch & Probus Aemilius In eius vita. do re­port. Paul. Orosius Lib. 3. ca. 2. saith, that the Lacedaemonians did chose to haue their K. halt rather thē their kingdom. Herodotus Vbi. 5.also writeth that after the death of Codrus king of Athens, Medon his eldest son, & Neleus the next, did contend for the kingdom, because Neleus would not giue place to Medon, who was by reason of his lame legs, if not vnable, yet vnapt to gouerne. The matter being almost brought to the sentence of the sword, it was mediated between thē, that the cō ­trouersie should be decided by the Oracle of Apollo-Apollo was consulted; by whose iudgement Medon was declared king. Iosephus Antiqu. 14. ca. 1 hath left recorded, that Aristobulus & Hircanus, after a long & cruel contētion for the kingdom of Iury, made Pompeie the iudge of that right which by arms they wer vnable to decide. Hircanus alleaged that he was eldest brother; Aristo­bulus excepted, that Hircanus was insufficient to go­uern a realme. Hereupon Pompei gaue sentence, that Aristobulus should giue ouer the kingdome which he did vsurp, & Hircanus be restored to his estate. [Page] The like iudgement doth Liuy Lib. 1.2. belli Iu [...]ci. write, that Annibal gaue for the kingdome of that country, which is now called Sauoy Allobroges. restoring Brancus vnto his right, from which he had beene by his younger brother expelled. And although Pyrrus did appoint that sonne to succede, whose sworde had the best edge, yet was the eldest acknowledged, who bare the least reputation for valour. Lisander moued the Lacedae­monians to decree, that the most sufficient, & not al­wais the next in bloud of the ligne of Hercules, should be admitted to the kingdome; yet Plutarch In Lisan [...]i. saith, that he found no man to second his aduise.

I will adde an example of later times. Ladislaus, a man more famous for the sanctitie of his life, then for his kingdom of Hungary, left by his brother Gri­sa two nep [...]ewes; Colomannus the elder, who was dwarfye, lame, crooke-backt, crab-faced, blunt and bleare-eyed, a stammerer, and (which is more) a Priest: and Almus the younger, a man free from iust exception. Yet these respectes set aside, a dispensa­tion was obteined from the Pope, and Colomannus, notwithstanding his deformities and defectes, was accepted by the people for king Mich [...]el Ric­cius.. Girarde Lib. 1. de l c. st [...]e de France. writeth, that the custome of the French was to honour their kings whatsoeuer they were, whether foolish or wise, able or weake: esteeming the name of king to be sacred, by whomsoeuer it should be borne. And therfore they supported in estate, not onely Charles the simple, but Charls the 6. also, who raigned many years in open distēperature & disturbance of minde.

So you see, that the practise of many nations haue beene contrary to your conceipt: and that the [Page] interpreters of the ciuill and canon lawe (good ar­bitrators of naturall equitie) either beare against you, or stand for you onely when disabilitie is natu­rall: adding further, that if the excluded successor hath a sonne, before or after succession doth fall, free from any such defect, the right of the king­dome descendeth vnto him. This affirmeth Baldus Cons. 389. lib. 2., Socinus Cons 4 [...]. lib. 3., Cardinall Alexander In. c. 1. tit. an mu [...]us vel imper­fectus., and before them, An­dreas Iserna. In c. vlt. tit. [...] pif. vel ab.Because the inhabilitie of parents doth not preiudice the children, especially in regard of their naturall rightes l. 3. D [...]le in­terdic. & rel. l. 2. C [...]de libert. & co [...]. lib [...]diui fra­tres. D. de iur. patr l quaeritur D. de bo lib. pa­nor. cons. 85. lib. 1. Io. Annd. in c. significasti de so. comp.: neither is it any impediment wherefore they should not enioy either priuiledge or dignitie from the person of their grandfather. Magis est (saith Vlpian In l. vii. in fi. de senat.) vt aui potius dignitas prosit, quam obsit casus patris. It is fitter that the son should receiue profit by the dignitie of his grandfather, then preiudice by his fathers chaunce.

And this (we may thinke) is a reasonable respect, wherefore other interpreters haue not allowed their principall opinion, in repelling him who is disabled by birth. For if another be once possessed of his place, it will be hard for any of his children to attaine their right: Wherevpon difunion, facti­ons, warres may easily arise. It is inconuenient (I grant) to be gouerned by a king, who is defectiue in body or in minde: but it is a greater inconuenience, by making a breache in this high point of state, to open an entrance for all disorders, wherein ambiti­on and insolencie may range at large. For as mis­chiefe is of that nature that it cannot stand, but by supportaunce of another euill, and so multipli­eth in it selfe, till it come to the highest, and [Page] then doth ruine with the proper weight: so mindes once exceeding the boundes of obediēce, cease not to strengthen one bouldnesse by another, vntil they haue inuolued the whole state in confusiō. We find that Gabriel the yongest brother of the house of Sa­luse kept his eldest brother in close prisō, vsurped his estate, and gaue forth for satisfaction to the people, that hee was mad. I could report many like exam­ples: but I shal haue occasion to speake more here­of in the further passage betwixt vs.

• 1 That inclination to liue in companie is of na­ture.
• 2 That gouernement and iurisdiction of magi­strates is also of nature.
• 3 That no one particulare forme of gouerne­ment is naturall; for then it should be the same in all countries, seeing God and nature is one to all.

But before I ioyne with you, either in contra­diction or consent, it shall not be amisse to declare briefly, what we vnderstand by the lawe of nature, and by what meanes it may best be knowne.

God in the creation of man, imprinted certaine rules within his soule, to direct him in all the ac­tions of his life: which rules, because we tooke them when wee tooke our beeing, are commonly called the primarie lawe of Nature: of which sort the ca­nons c [...]ius naturale. dist. 3accompt these precepts following. To worship god: to obey parents and gouernours, & therby to conserue common society: lawful coniunction of man & woman: suc­cession [Page] of children: education of children: acquisition of things which pertaine to no man: equall libertie of all: to communicate commodities: to repell force: to hurt no man: and generally, to do to another as he would be done vnto: which is the sum and substance of the second table of the decalogue. And this lawe Thom. Aquine 1.2. q. 94. d. 2. affirmeth to be much depraued by the fall of man; and afterwards more, by errour, euill custome, per­tinacie, and other corrupters of the mind: and yet doth it yeeld vs so large light, that Saint Paule rom. cap. 2. & 3. did esteeme it sufficient to condemne the gentiles, who had no other law written.

Out of these precepts are formed certaine cu­stomes, generally obserued in all parts of the world: which, because they were not from the beginning, but brought in afterward, some as a consequence or collection, others as a practise or execution of the first naturall precepts, are called the secondarie lawe of nature, and by many also the law of nations. Gaius, quod naturali [...] ratio inter om­nes homine [...] constituit, id apud omnes peraeque custoditur voca­turque ius gen­tium. l. ix. D. de iust. & iur. saith: that which naturall reason doth constitute among all men, is obserued by all alike, and termed the lawe of Nations: and the same is called by Iustinian iust. de ter. de­ni. §. singulorum.; the lawe of nature. Cicero in re consensio omn. ū gentium, lex naturae pu­tanda est. i. Tuscal.likewise saith: the consent of al nations is to be esteemed the lawe of nature.

But this is to be takē, not as though al natiōs haue at any time obserued one vsage alike: it is not necessary faith Baldus in l 1. C. de testam., that the word al [...] should cary so large a sēce: neither hath it euer bin brought into knoledge what customes all nations haue held in vse. And it is most certain, that ther is not one point or precept of the law of nature, but, by reasō, partly of the weak­nes, partly of the corruption, which the fal of Adam [Page] fasten in his posteritie, some people haue at all times, either neglected or els depraued: some be­ing so dull as they could not perceiue, others so ma­licious as they would denie, that which nature did lay before them. Yea, such is either the weakenesse or wilfulnesse of our iudgement, that they who are not onely admitted but admired for wise men, doe many times disagree in determining what is most a­greeable to nature: much lesse may we either expect or imagine, that al natiōs, so differēt, so distāt, neuer so much as now, and yet not now fully discouered, should iūpe in one iudgemēt for vniform obseruatiō of any custome: neither is that no natural right, as Ze­nophon 4. Socrat.noteth, which many dayly doe transgresse.

And therefore Donellus In com. in. 6. did vniustly reiect the dis­cription which Gaius gaue of the law of nations, by taking the word al in the amplest sence. S. Ambrose Ad ephes. 4. and S. Hierome Tit.did in this sort declare it; that we are to take that for a decree of natiōs, which successiue­ly and at times hath beene obserued by all. But as for any one time, as it is to be iudged the decree or custome of a whole citty, which hath passed by con­sent of the most part, although al haue not allowed, and some perhaps haue opposed against it c. [...]. de decret. ab ord. fac. l. 32. de legi.; so is it to be esteemed the lawe of nations, the common lawe of the whole world, which most nations in the world are found to imbrace.

And because gouernment was not from the be­ginning, but induced as a consequēce of the prima­ry precept of nature; to maintaine humane societie: therefore whensoeuer wee speake of naturall go­uernment, we are intended to meane the secondary [Page] lawe of nature, which is the receiued custōe, succes­siuely of al, & alwaies of most nations in the world.

Out of this we may gather, that three rules doe chiefly lead vs to the knowledg of this law. The first is that which Cicero ad Q. fratrem. prouocandū ad sensus.in the like case giueth: to appeale vnto sēce: because there is no man but by the light of nature, hath some sence of that which nature doth allowe. S. Augustine interiori nescio qua conscientia i [...]aec sentimus. de vtti. cred. saith, I know not by what inward conscience we feele these things: and likewise Tertulli­an omn [...] malum aut timore aut pudor natura perfu [...]it. in apol.: Nature hath tainted all euill eyther with feare or with shame. Wherto agreeth that which S. Ambrose lice possin: negare, non pos­sunt tamen non crubesc. 1 c. 3. de offic 14. saith: although they deny it, they cannot but shew some to­kens of shame. Herupō the authors of the ciuill lawe l. 3. si auro. D. de vsur. l. 8. D. quib. mo. pi. sold. 15. de cond. l. 14. D. de nup. do reiect that for vniust, which is not demaunded without shew of shame. For, as Cassiodorus 7. var. 16.writeth; God hath giuē [...]l men such a sence of iustice, that they who know not the lawes, cannot but acknowledge the reason of truth.

But because this light of nature, in many men is exceeding dimme; the next rule is to obserue what hath bin allowed by those who are of greatest both wisedome and integrity, in whom nature doth shew her selfe most cleere. For as Aristotle saith topic. prin.; that is pro­bable which prooued men do approue. Among these, the first place pertaineth vnto them, who by inspiration of god, haue compiled the books of holy scripture: to whom as attendants we may adioyne the anciēt counsailes & fathers of the church. The next place is to be giuē to the authors of the ciuill lawe; whose iudgement hath bin these many hundred yeers, ad­mired by many, approoued by all, and is at this daie accepted for lawe, almost in all states of the christiā [Page] common wealth. To these also we may adioyne, as attendants, their interpreters of most approued note. The third place is due to Philosophers, histo­riographers, orators and the like; who haue not vn­profitably endeauoured to free nature of two cloudes, wherewith shee is often ouercast: grosse ignorance, and subtill errour.

But because naturall reason, as Alciate 5. consil. 38. affirmeth, doth sometimes varie, according to the capacitie of particulare men; euen as the sunne, beeing in it selfe alwaies the same, giueth neither heate nor light to all alike: the third rule followeth, to obserue the common vse of all nations, which Cicero ipsius vocem naturae de natur. deot.cal­leth; the voice of nature: because as Aristotle 15. prob. 3.hath written, it is not done by chance which euery where is done. Plato 8. de legib.saith, this shall be the proofe hereof, that no man doth otherwise speake: and likewise Baldus 4. consil. 496., I dare not disalow that which the world alloweth. And in this cō ­mon lawe or custome of the world, three circum­stancies are to be considered: antiquitie, continu­ance, and generalitie.

Now then your first position is so cleerelie true, that you doe but guild gould in labouring to prooue it: for man is not onely sociable by nature, but (as Aristotle 1. polit.affirmeth) more sociable then any other liuing creature. These notorious pointes, the more we prooue, the more we obscure.

Your second is also true, for as Tullie saith sine imperio n [...]c d [...]mus vlla, nec ciuita [...], nec gen, neel omi­nem vniu [...]t sum genus state, n [...]c re [...]um natura om [...] nec ipse den. que m [...]dus potest. [...]. de legib. Without empire, neither house, nor citty, nor nation, nor mankinde can stand, nor the nature of all things, nor in a word, the world it selfe. Whereto agreeth [Page] that of Aristotle [...]. 1. polit. ca. 3.: gouernment is both necessary and also profitable. But whereas you bring in proofe here­of, that there was neuer people founde, either in auncient time, or of late discouerie, which had not some magistrate to gouerne them, neither is it necessarie, and yet false. It is not necessarie to haue so large a consent of nations, as I haue de­clared before: and it is false that in all times and na­tions there haue beene magistrates. After the deluge, magistrates were not knowne vntil kings did arise, as hereafter it shall appeare. The Iewes were often without either magistrates or gouerne­ment: Whereupon in certaine places of the booke of Iudges ca. 17. ver. 6. & ca. vlt in si.it is thus written: In those dayes there was no king in Israell, but what seemed right to euery man that did hee.

Sometimes Democraticall gouernement doth drawe to a pure anarchie; and so doth the in­terregnum of electiue principalities. Leo Aser re­porteth, that in Guzala, a countrie of Africke, the people haue neither king nor forme of go­uernement; but vpon dayes of mart, they elect a captaine to secure their trafficke. The same authour deliuereth, that the inhabitantes of the mountaine Magnan, vpon the frontiers of Fez, haue noe forme of common wealth, but doe stay trauailers (vnpartiall iudges) to decide their con­trouersies. Leo himselfe was arrested to bee their iudge, and when hee had spent many dayes in determining their debates, hee was in the end presented with hennes, ducks, geese and other of [Page] their countrie commodities, which serued onelie to discharge his host. And if this your reason should bee of force then were not sociabilitie naturall, because many men haue made choise to liue a­lone.

But how thē, wil you say, is nature immutable? It is in abstracto, but it is not in subiecto. Or thus: In it selfe it is not chāged: in vs, by reasō of our imperfectiōs, it is. Or els more plainely, it is not changed, but it is trāsgrested. But nature, you say, is alike to al. Not so, good sir: because all are not apt alike to receiue her: euen as the sun beames doe not reflect alike vpon a cleane and cleare glasse, and vpon a glasse that is either filthy or course: And in many, not onely men, but nations, euill custome hath driuen nature out of place, and setteth vp it selfe in steade of na­ture l. si quis post. humos. D. de lib. et posth..

Your third conclusion, that no particulare forme of gouernement is naturall, doth not finde so easie acceptaunce. Your onely proofe is, that if it were otherwise, there should be one forme of gouerne­ment in all nations; because god and nature is one to all. But this reason I haue encountred before: and yet you take paines to puffe it vp with many waste words; howe the Romanes changed gouern­ment; how in Italie there is, a pope, a king and many dukes; how Millaine, Burgundie, Loraine, Bavier, Gascoint, and Britaine the lesse were changed from kingdomes to dukedomes; howe Germanie was once vnder one king, and is now deuided among dukes, earles, and other supreme princes; How Castile, Aragone, Portugall, Barcelona and other [Page] countries in Spaine, were first Earldomes, then Dukedomes, then seuerall Kingdomes, and now are vnited into one; how B [...]eme and Polonia were once Dukedomes, and now are Kingdomes; how Fraunce was first one kingdome, then deui­ded into fower, and lastly reduced into one. How England was first a Monarchie, vnder the Britaines, then a Prouince vnder the Romaines, after that diui­ded into seauen Kingdomes, and lastly reduced in­to one; how the people of Israell were first vnder Patriarkes, Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, then vnder Captains, then vnder Iudges, thē vnder high Priests, then vnder Kings, and then vnder Captaines and high Priests againe.

I will not followe you in euery by way where­into your errours doe leade (for who would haue aduentured to affirme, that the childrē of Israell were vnder Abraham and Isaac; and that the Britaines at the first were vnder one King, whereas Caesar repor­teth that hee found fower kings in that country which is now called Kent) but I will onely insist v­pon the principall point; in regard whereof, all this bundell of wordes is like a blowne bladder, full of winde, but of no weight.

For first you doe but trifle vpon tearmes, in putting a difference betweene Kings, Dukes, and Earles, which holde their state with soueraigne power. Wee speake not of the names, but of the gouernement of Princes. Supreme rulers may dif­fer in name; they may change name also, either by long vse, or vpon occasion: and yet in gouern­ment neither differ nor change.

[Page]Secondly, it is a more vaine ieast to put a dif­ference (in this regarde) beweene a great territo­rie and a small. If a kingdome bee enlarged or streight [...]ed in limites, the gouernement is not thereby changed: if many kingdomes bee vnited into one; if one bee diuided into many; the na­ture of gouernment is no more altered, then is the tenure of lande, either when partition is made, or when many partes accrewe into one. The knot of doubt is, whether it bee not natu­rall, that one state, bee it great or small, should rather bee commaunded by one person, howso­euer intitled, then by many.

And if wee descende into true discourse, wee shall finde, that the verie sinewes of go­uernment doe consist, in commaunding and in obeying. But obedience can not bee performed, where the commaundementes are, eyther re­pugnant or vncertaine: neither can these in­conueniences bee any waies auoided, but by vnion of the authoritie which doth com­maunde.

This vnion is of two sortes; first, when one commaundeth; secondly, when many doe knit in one power and will. The first vnion is na­turall; the seconde is by meane of amitie, which is the onely bande of this collectiue bodie: and the moe they are who ioyne in go­uernment, the lesse naturall is their vnion, and the more subiect to dissipation. For as Tacitus saith Arduvm sem­per codem loci potcutiam & cō ­cordiam esse. iiiii. annal.: aequalitie and amitie are scarce compa­tible.

[Page]Naturall reason teacheth vs, that all mul­titude beginneth from one, and the auncient Philosophers haue helde, that from vnitie all thinges doe proceede, and are againe resolued into the same. Of which opinion Laertius In pr [...]ncipt [...] lib. d [...] v [...]tis [...]en­tenti [...]que Phi­losophorum. re­porteth that Musaeus of Athens was authour, who liued long before Homer: but afterwardes it was renewed by Pythagoras, as Plutarch Lib. de dogma­tis Philosophorū. A­lexander In successioni­bus Philosopho­rum., and Laertius Lib. 8. de vi [...]is & sententiis Phi­losophorum. doe write: who ad­ded thereunto, that vnitie is the originall of good, and dualitie of euill: And of this opi­nion Saint Hierome Lib. 1. contra Iouinian. was also, whose sentence is repeated in the canonicall decrees c. nuptiae. 32. di. 1. but vn­der the title and name of Saint Ambrose. Here­upon Homer doth oftentimes call good [...], and applyeth the terme [...], to affliction and trouble. Hereupon Galen Lib. 6. de sanit. tuend. also writeth, that the best in euerye kinde is one. Plato produceth all thinges from one In Timaeo.; measureth all thinges by one In Philebo.; and reduceth all thinges into one In Epinomide..

The whole worlde is nothinge but a greate state; a state is no other then a greate familie; and a familie no other then a greate bodye. As one GOD ruleth the worlde, one maister the familie, as all the members of one bodye receiue both sence and motion from one heade, which is the seate and tower both of the vnder­standing and of the will: so it seemeth no lesse naturall, that one state should be gouerned by one commaunder.

[Page]The first of these arguments was vsed by Soliman, Lord of the Turkes Anno. 1552.. Who hauing strangled Sul­tane Mustapha his sonne, because at his returne out of Persit, he was receiued by the soldiers with great demonstrations of ioy; hee caused the dead bodie to be cast forthe before the armie, and appointed one to crye; There is but one God in Heauen, and one Sultane vpon earth. The second was vsed by Agesi­laus, to one that moued the Spartans for a popular gouernment; goe first (saide hee) and stablish a popular gouernment within your owne doores. To the third Tacitus Vnum imperii corpus vnius ani­mo regendum videtur. 1. annal. did allude, when hee saide: The body of one Empire seemeth best to be gouerned by the soule of one man.

In the heauens there is but one Sunne; which Serinus [...].also applyeth vnto gouernement, in affir­ming, that if wee set vp two sunnes, we are like to set all in combustion.

Many sociable creatures haue for one company, one principall either gouernour or guide; which al authors take for a natural demonstration of the go­uernment of one.

And if you require herein the testimonie of men, you shall not finde almost any that writeth vpon this subiect, but hee doth, if not alleage, yet al­low that of Homer: [...] one Lord, one King. Plutarch declareth both his owne iudgement concerning this point, and also the consent of o­thers, in affirming [...]. in Enagora. that all men did acknowledge, that the gouernment of a King is the most excellēt benefit that God hath giuen vnto men.

Callimachus saith, [...]. that Kings proceede from [Page] god: Homer affirmeth, [...]. that they are cherished by god. Your selfe doe shew In cap. 1. out of Aristotle, Seneca, Plutarch, S. Hierome, S. Chrysost [...]me and S. Peter, that monarchie is the most excellent and perfect go­uernement, most resembling the gouernement of god, and most agreeable vnto nature. But what doe you meane to acknowledge all this, and yet to de­nie that monarchie is naturall? doe you take it to be aboue nature? or how els is it most excellent and perfect? how is it most agreeable to nature, and yet not naturall? can any action be most agreeable to iustice, and yet not iust? I know not by what strate­geme, or cunning cranck of the schools, you can be made agreeable to your selfe.

But now if we consider the generall custome of al people, we shall find that all the ancient nations in whom the laws of nature were least corrupt, had no other gouernment: as the Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Parthians, Indians, Scythians, Sirians, Phoeniciās, Ara­biās, Aegyptians, Africans, Numidiās, Mauritaniās, Bri­tās, Celtes, Gaules, Latines, Hetruscanes, Siciliās, Atheniās, Lacaedemoniās, Corinthiās, Achaeās, Sicyonians, Candiās, & in one word, all. Tullie saith certū est omnos antiqua [...] gentes regibus paruisse. 3. de legib.: it is certaine, that al an­ciēt nations were vnder kings: with which opinion Sa­lust in Caulin.consenteth; & Iustine also, where he saith principio tersū, gentium natio­numque imperi­um p [...]nes r [...]ges crat. lib. 1.; the ē ­pire of natiōs at the first was in the hands of kings. And whē the people of Israel desired a king, they alleged that al other nations were gouerned by kings 1. reg. 8.5..The Athenians were the first (as Plinie affirmeth) who set vp the gouernment of many, whose exāple certaine other towns of Greece did follow, rather blinded by ābitiō, thē led by iudgemēt. Amōg these, if the high­est [Page] authority were in the least part of the citisens, it was called aristocracy; if in the most or in all, it was termed democracy; wherin you confesse in ca. 2. that neither they did nor could any long time continue; but after many tumults, seditions, mutinies, outrages, iniusti­cies, banding of factions, and inundations of bloud, they were in the end either dissolued or vanquished, and reduced againe vnder gouernement of one.

The state of Rome began vnder kings; it atteined the highest pitch both of glory and greatnes vnder emperors: in the middle time, wherin it neuer inioy­ed x. yeeres together free frō sedition, Polybius saith that is was mixed; the consulls represēting a monar­chie, the senate, an aristocracie, & the cōmon people a democracy: which opinion was likewise embraced by Dionysius Halicarnasseus, Cicero, Cantarine and o­thers. But many do hold that the state of Rome at that time was populare: which seemeth to be confir­med by the famous lawier & coūsailer Vlpian, where he saith vtpote cum le­ge re [...]a quae denu [...]crio cius lara est, populus e [...] & in eum omne su­r [...]m im: cusuin & pot. statem con­sera l 1. D. de c [...]st pr [...]ne. that the people did grāt al their power & au­thority to the prince. Whatsoeuer it was in shew, in very deede it was alwayes gouerned by some one principall man. Liuie wrighteth of Scipio sub vmbra cius vrbem terratum d [...]minam latere, [...]us nutus [...]ro decretis patrum, pro iustis populi [...]sse. lib [...]0., that vnder his shadow the city was protected, & that his looks were in stead of lawes: & likewise of Papirius cursor nemo erat quo magis innixa res romana, qu m [...]in Papirio cutsore c [...]tatet. lib. [...].; that he sustained the Romane affaires. So said Thuci­dides, that Athens was in appearance populare, but Aristides was the true monarch thereof: & Plutarch in [...]pelopid. also affirmeth, that Pelopidas and Epaminondas were no lesse then lords of the populare state of Thebes: but after the death of these mē, both the states of A­thens and Thebes floated in tumults, as the same au­thour obserueth in pericle,, like a ship in a tempest without a [Page] pilot. So did Peter Sodarine Gonsalonier of Florence giue forth, that the title of popularity was vsed as a maske, to shadow the tyrāny of Laurence Medices: but Florence did neuer so florish both in honor, wealth, and quiet, as vnder that tyranny. Also in actions of weight, in great dangers and necessities the Romans had recourse to one absolute and supreme commā ­der, which Liuie calleth trepidi patres ad summum au [...] ­ilium decurrunt Dictatorem dici placuit. lib 6.the highest refuge; whose authority as the Romans did most reuerētly respect, so was it many times fearefull to their enemies. Of the first, Liuie saith Dictatoris edic­tum pro numine semper obserua­tum. lib. 6.; the Dictators edict was alwayes ob­serued as an oracle: of the second tantus erat dic­tatoris terror a­pud hostes, vt co creato statim a manibus disces­serint. lib. co., so soone as a dictator was created, such a terror came vpon the enemies, that they departed presently from the walles. Likewise in cases of extremity the Lacedaemonians had their high go­uernour whom they called Harmostes; the Thessaloni­ans had their Archos; and the Mytilenians also their great Aezymnetes. Lastly, Tacitus reporteth ve recte pru­dentes quidam de vita Augusti post mortem eius inter se conferen­tes, dix [...]runt, non aliud discordan­tis patriae reme­dium suisse, quam si ab vno regere­tur. ann. 1.that cer­taine wise men discoursing of the life of Augustus af­ter his death, affirmed rightly, that ther was no other meane to appease the discordes of the state, but by reducing it vnder the gouernement of one.

Let vs now take a view of our present age. In al Asia, from whence Tullie saith, in epist. 1. ad Q. Fratreu [...].ciuility did first spread in­to other parts of the world, no gouernment is in vse but by a monarch, as appeareth by the Tartarians, Turks, Persians, Indians, Chinans & Cataians: no other gouernmēt is found to be foūded in al the cuntries of Affrick: in America also and all the west parts of the world, no other is yet discouered: in Europe on­ly, vpō eyther declining or chāg of the empire, a few towns in Germany & Italy did reuiue againe the go­uernment of many: som are alredy returned to a mo­narchy, [Page] and the residue in their time will do the like, euen as all others haue done which haue bene before them.

What then shal we say of this so ancient, so con­tinuall, so generall consent of all nations? what can we say, but cōclude with Tertullian in apolog.. these testimonies, the more true, the more simple; the more simple, the more common; the more common, the more natu [...]all; the more naturall, the more deuine.

But because ambition is a most firy affection, and carieth men blindfold into headlong hopes, wherby many do aspire to beare rule, neither they good, nor with any good either means or end; the custome or lawe of nations hath by two reines endeauored to keep in this raging desire: by succession & by electi­on. And yet againe, because election is most often, if not alwaies, entangled with many inconueniences; as first, for that the outragies during the vacancy, are many & great; euery one that is either grieued or in wāt, assuming free power both for reuēge & spoile. Secondly, for that the bouldest winneth the garlād more often then the best; because the fauour of the people doth alwayes tast more of affection then of iudgement. Thirdly, for that they who do not leaue their state to their posterity, wil dissipate the domain and worke out of it either profit or friends; for so we see that the empire of Germanie is pluckt bare of her fairest feathers. Fourthly, for that occasions of war are hereby ministred; & that, either whē one taketh his repulse for indignity; vpō which ground Fraun­cis the first, king of Fraūce, could neuer be driuē out of practise against Charles the 5. emperor; or els whē by means of factiōs many are elected, as it happened [Page] in Almaine when Lewes of Bauier, and Albert of Au­stria were elected Emperors, wherupon eight yeers warre betweene them did ensue; and as it often happened in the Empire of Rome, when one Em­perour was chosen by the Senate, and another by the Soldiers, and sometimes by euery legion one; whereby such fiers were kindled, as could not bee quenched without much bloude. For these warres are most cruelly executed; because the quarrell lea­ueth no middle state inter summum & praecipitium; betweene the highest honour and the deadliest downe­fall.

For these and diuers other respectes, it hath bin obserued, at most times in all nations, and at all times in most, that the roialtie hath passed by suc­cession, according to propinquitie of bloud. We read that Ptolomie, who after the death of Alexander the great seazed vpon Aegypt, and part also of A­rabia and of Africk, left that state to his youngest sonne: but Trogus saide, and out of him Iustine Lib. 16., that it was against the lawe of Nations, and that v­pon this occasion one of them did worke the death of the other. And therefore when afterward Ptolo­mie surnamed Physcon, at the importunitie of his wife Cleopatra, would haue preferred his youngest son to the succession of his kingdom, Iustine saith Lib. 39., that the people opposed themselues against it; but Pausanias Lib. 1. more probably affirmeth, that they reuer­sed his order after his death.

The same course was held in Italy by the Hetruscanes, Latines, and those Albanes from whome the Romanes tooke their originall. Liuie Lib. 1.writeth that Procas king [Page] of the Albanes appointed Numitor to succeede in his estate, but Amulius his yonger brother did vsurpe it by force: hereupon Dionysius Halicarnasseus Lib. 1. saith; that Amulius held the kingdome against right, be­cause it appertained to his elder brother.

Among the Graecians, during the space of six hun­dred yeares, wherein they were gouerned by kings, we finde but Timondas and Pittacus who were elec­ted, the one of Corinth, the other of Negropont; the residue held their states by order of successiō, as Thu­cidides affirmeth, encoūtring therein the opinion of Aristotle. Liuy writeth Belli macedo­nici. lib. 10., that Perseus king of Macedon said, that by the order of Nature, the law of Nati­ons, and the ancient custome of Macedony, the el­dest sonne was to succeede in the kingdome. Diodo­rus Siculus Lib. 16., and Iustine Lib. 7. doe report, that by this custom Alexander succeeded his father Amyntas, be­fore his yonger brother Phillippe.

Herodotus In Euterpe.declareth that the same order was obser­ued amōg the Troianes; affirming, that after the death of Priamus, the kingdom was not to deuolue vnto A­lexāder, because Hector was before him in years. The same also doth appeare by that which Virgil writeth:

Out of which place Seruius Maurus doth col­lect, that women also did vse to gouerne. But more plainely this custome of the Troianes doth appeare, by that which Messala Coruinus Lib ad oc [...]au. August. writeth, that Troius had two sonnes, Ilus and Assaracus; and that Ilus by priuiledge of his age succeeded in the kingdome.

[Page]The Persians also, who for a long time held the reines of all the nations neere vnto them, had the same order of succession, as Zenophon In Cytopaed. witnesseth; which is also confirmed by two famous histories; one between Artaxerxes & Cyrus, wherof Plutarch In Artaxerxe. maketh mention, the other between Artabazanes & Xerxes, reported by Herodotus In polyhimnia. & Iustine Lib. 2.; wherin Ar­tabazanes alleaged, that it was a custome among all men, that the eldest son should first succeed. Agatho­cles, & out of him Athenaeus do write, that the Persians had a golden water (for so they terme it) whereof it was capital for any man to drinke, but only the king and his eldest son. Whither this water were drawen out of the riuer Euleus, which inuironeth the tower Susis, & the Temple of Diana, wherof Pliny Lib. 6. ca. 28.writeth, that only the kings of Persia did drink; or whether out of Choaspis, whose waters Herodotus doth report to haue bin boiled, & caried after the king in siluer vessels; or whether both these were one riuer, I will neither determine nor discourse.

In Siria, which is called Assiria (as Herodotus Lib. 7., wri­teth) & also Phoenicia, Palestina, & Mesopotamia, as ap­peareth by Pliny Lib. 5. ca. 12. Eusebius De praeparar. euang. lib. 10.& diuers other, the same custome is proued by that which Iustine lib. 34.,& L. Florus Lib. 46. doe write, that Demetrius, hauing bin deliuered by his brother Antiochus, king of Siria, for an hostage to the Romanes, & hearing of the death of Antiochus, de­clared to the senat in open assēbly, that as by the law of nations he had giuen place to his elder brother, so by the same law, the right of succession was then cast vpon him. The Parthians, who being thrice attemp­ted by the Romans, in the time of their chiefest both [Page] discipline and strength, were able to beare them­selues victorious, did alwaies acknowledge for their king, the next of the bloud of their first king Arsa­ces Iustin. lib. 14. & 41.. Among the Germaines also, who were of force to defeate fiue consulare armies of the Romanes, Tacitus De morib. Ger.affirmeth that the eldest sonne did intirely succeede, onely the horses did fall to the most va­liant. And that this was likewise the custome of the Iewes, it is euidēt by the whole history of their kings, especially where it is said 2. Chron. ca. 21., that Ioram succeeded Io­saphat; & the reason added, because he was the eldest.

I should but burne day (as the saying is) in running further vpon particulars. Herodotus In polyhimnia. doth aduow it to be a general custome among al men, that the first in birth is next in succession. Certaine ages after him S. Hierome In epist ad ona­grium, & in gen. 49.said, that a kingdom is due vnto the eldest. In late ages our selues may see, that the Tartars Turks, Persians, & all the Asiaticks haue no other form of cōstituting their kings. No other is folowed in all the countries of Africk. In the west Indies no o­ther is yet discouered; Insomuch as when Frances Pi­zaire, in the conquest of Peru, had slain Atibalippa the king therof, the people brake into shew, some of ioy, all of contentmēt; because he had made his way to the kingdom, by murthering of his elder brother. In Europe it is not long since all the Monarchies were successiue. When the Empire of Almaine was made electiue, it became in short time so either troblesom or base, that diuers Princes refused to accept it: of late it hath bin setled in one family, but hath as yet li­tle increased either in dignity or in power. The peo­ple of Denmarke, Sweden, Hungary, and B [...]eme, doe [Page 17] chalenge to themselues a right of election, but they accept their king by propinquitie of bloud. So they did in Polonia, vntill the line of Iagello was worne out, and then they elected for king, Henry duke of Aniou in France: since which time, they haue alwaies in the change of their kings, exposed their state to faire danger of ruine.

Vpon this both generall and continuall custome Baldus Cons. 275. vol. 2. saith, that kingdomes are successiue by the law of nations; affirming further, L. Ex hoc iure D. de iust & iuro. semper fuit, & semper erit. &c.that alwayes it hath beene, & alwayes it shall bee, that the first borne succeedeth in a kingdome: wherein he is either follo­wed or accompanied with open crie of al the choise interpreters of both lawes; as namely the Glosso­grapher, Iohan. Andreas, Hostiensis, Collect. Pet. An­choranus, Antonius, Imola, Card. Florentinus, Abb. Panormitanus in c. Licet. de voto., Oldradus Cons. 94. & 274., Albericus in prooem. D. §. Discipuli., Angelus Cons. 287., Felinus in c. Prudentiā de offic. de leg., Paul. Castrensis in l maximum. C. de lib. praeter. & cons. 179 li. 1., Alexander Cons. 25. lib. 5., Barbatius Cons. 2., Franc. Curtius Con. 67., Guido Pape Deci. 476. & con. 60., Card. Alexander in c. 1. tit de his qui feud. da. poss. & in c. Qualite [...]. tit. Si de feu. su cont. inter do., Phi­lip. Francus in [...]ub de test. lib. [...]. & inc. grandi. de sup. [...]cque prael., Iason in l. 1. D. de const. prin. & in l. n [...]mo. de leg. 1., Philippus Decius, Carol Cons. 225. [...] 289.. Ruinis Cons. 25. lib. 1, Anto. Corsetta Tract. de pu [...]. & excel. regia q. 9., Ripa in [...] quart. ad l. Falcid., Calderine Cons. 9. tit de feud, Alciate in l. Obuenire. D. de verb. fig., and ma­nie other of somewhat more ordinarie name. Who all with full voice do agree, that in kingdomes and other dignities, which cannot bee either valued or diuided but they are dismembred, the eldest son doth entirely succeed. And this manie of them do call the law of all Nations, deriued from the order of nature, and from the institution of God; and confirmed by the Canon, ciuil and other positiue lawes.

For the succession of children, is one of the pri­marie precepts of nature cius natural. dist. 1.: whereby his mortalitie is in some sort repaired, & his continuance perpetua­ted [Page 18] by his posteritie. But among al the children, na­ture seemeth to preferre the first borne, by imprin­ting in the mind of parents the greatest loue and in­clination towards them, as diuers of the authors be­fore alleaged do affirm; & as it may appeare by that of the prophet Zacharie Z [...]ch. 12.10., And they shall lamēt ouer him as men vse to lament in the death of their first borne: and likewise by that which is said of Dauid 2. Reg. 13.21., that he would not grieue his sonne Ammon, for that he lo­ued him, because he was his first borne. Hereupon Lyra In Exod. cap. 11, and before him Saint Augustin in term. de sep­tem plagis and Saint Chrysostome in Gen. hom. 51 do affirme that the last plague of the Egyptians, which was the death of their first borne, was the most sharpe and heauie vnto them. For no­thing (saith Saint Augustin Vbi [...].) is more deare then the first borne. Aristotle, Plinie De h [...]sto. ani­m [...]. lib 6. cap. 1 [...]., Aeltane Lib. 11. cap 40, and Tzet­zes do write, that the same affection is also found in certaine beasts. Histor. chilia. 4. cap 126.

And to this purpose is that which Herodotus De it otu ani­mal lib. 3. & lib. 15. cap. 13. re­porteth, in Arato., that when the Lacedaemanians had recei­ued an oracle, that they should take for kings the two sonnes of Aristodemus and Aegina, but giue most honor vnto the eldest, and they were ignorant which was eldest, because the mother and the Nurse refu­sed to declare it; they obserued which of the chil­dren the mother did wash and feed first, and thereby found out that Eristhenes was the eldest. Lucian [...]. in dia logo [...] ci­teth the loue of the first borne, as growne into a pro­uerbe. Gregorie Nazianzene saith [...]., that all men haue a sense thereof. Saint Ambrose Lib. 2 de Cain & Abel. cap. 2. writeth, that in this respect God called the people of Israel his first borne Exod. 4., for that they were, not most ancient, but best [Page 19] beloued. Lastly S. Chrysostome Homil 5 ad­uersus Iudaeos. affirmeth that the first borne were to be esteemed more honorable then the rest.

And this naturall precedence both in honour and in fauour, seemeth to be expressely ratified by God; first where he said vnto Cain, of his brother Abel Gen 47., His desires shall be subiect vnto thee, and thou shalt haue do­minion ouer him: according to which institution, whē Iacob had bought his brothers right of birth, Isaak blessed him in these words Gen. 27.19. Bee Lord ouer thy bre­thren, and let the sonnes of thy mother bow before thee: Secondly, where he forbiddeth the father to disin­herit the first sonne of his double portion; because by right of birth it is his due Deut. 1.17.: Thirdly, where he ma­keth choise of the first borne to be sanctified to him­selfe Exod. 13.2. & 22.19. & 34. 19 Leuit. 27.26. Num 1.13 & 8.16 & 18.15. N [...]hem. 10.36. [...]zech. 44.30.: Luk 2.23.. And whereas God hath often preferred the youngest, as Abel, Isaac, Iacob, Iuda, Phares, Ephraim, Moses, Dauid, Salomon, and others; it was no other then that which Christ Matth. 19.30. & 20.16. Marc. 10.31. Luc. 13.10. said, that manie that were last should be first: and that which Saint Paul hath deliuered 1. Cor. 1. circa si., that God hath chosen the weak, and base, and contemptible things of this world, least any flesh should glorie in his sight. So hath Herodotus writ­ten lib. 7. how Artabanus the Persian, in complaining maner did confesse, that God delighted to depresse those things that were high.

But if the first borne die before succession fall; or if being possessed of the kingdom, he die without issue; his right of birth deuolueth vnto the next in bloud: and if he dieth in like maner, then vnto the third, and so likewise to the rest in order. This is affirmed by Albericus in preoem D. § Discipuli Et in L. donationes. C. de d [...]n. inter vir. & [...]x.; and may be confirmed by that which Bal­dus [Page 18] [...] [Page 19] [...] [Page 20] saith In L 2. C. de iur. Emphyt., that succession hath reference to the time of death, and respecteth the prioritie which is then extant Per l. Ex facto. [...] Pen. D. ad Treb.. And againe Cons. 275. lib. 2., He is not said the first borne in lawe, who dyeth before the fee openeth, but he who at that time is eldest in life. And this opinion is embraced by Alciate in l. Proximus. D. de [...]e [...]b. sig.; because as Celsus saith L. [...]x d [...]obus. D. de vu [...]g. & pu [...].; Primus is dicitur ante quē nemo sit, He is first who hath none before him. Iaco. A retinus, Cinus, Albericus and Baldus doe forme this case in l. Si quis priorit §. talem. D. de secund.: There is a custome, that the first borne of the first mariage shoulde succeede in a baronnie; a certaine baron had three wiues; by the first he had no children, by the other two manie; the first sonne of the second mariage shall succeede: because (as the glossographer there saith) the second mariage in regarde of the thirde is accompted first. Baldus Ibid. dooth extende it further; that if hee hath a sonne by the first mariage; and hee refuse the baronie, the first sonne by the second mariage shall succeede in his right: and so hee saith it was determi­ned in the kingdome of Apulia, when Lewes the kings eldest sonne was professed a friar. And this de­cision is allowed by Alexander in addit. Bar. l. 1. c. Qui habe­bat D. de bo. poss. [...] nt. tab & in disp [...]t. in cip. Si­gism [...]nd., Oldradus Cons. 92., and An­tonius Corsetta in t. act de pot. & excell. reg. q. 10. & q. 74.: and is prooued by plaine text of the canon law, both where the second borne is cal­led first borne, whē the first borne hath giuen place in c. quaeritur. §. item opponitur 22. q. 2.; and also where he is called the onlie sonne Vnigeni [...]us., whose brother is dead c nam & ego. Dever. fig.. But because it is a notorius custome that the neerest in bloud doth succeede, although perhaps remoued in degree, I wil labour no more to loade it with proofe: for who wil proclaime that the sunne doth shine?

But if we should now graunt vnto you (which is a [Page 21] greater curtesie, then with modesty you can require) that no particular forme of gouernement is naturall: what will you conclude thereof? what inference can you hereupon enforce? That there is no doubt but the people haue power to choose and to chaunge the fashion of gouernment, and to limitte the same vvith vvhat conditions they please. What Sir? can you finde no thirde? but that either one forme of gouernment is naturall, or that the peo­ple must alwaies retaine such libertie of power? haue they no power to relinquish their power? is there no possibilitie that they may loose it? whether are you so ignorant to thinke as you speake, or so de­ceitfull to speake otherwise then you thinke. There is no authoritie which the people hath in matters of state, but it may bee either bound or streightned by three meanes.

The first is by cession or graunt: for so the Ro­mans by the law of royaltie Lex regia. yeelded all their autho­ritie in gouernment to the Prince. Of this lawe Vlpi­an L. 1. de const. princ. maketh mention; and Bodin De rep. lib. 1. reporteth that it is yet extant in Rome grauen in stone. So the people of Cyrene; of Pergame and of Bithynia, did submit themselues to the Empire of the Romanes. So the Tartarians commit absolute power both ouer their liues and their liuings to euerie one of their Emperours: & so haue our people manie times cō ­mitted to their king the authoritie of the parliament either generallie, or els for some particular case. For it is held as a rule, that any man may relinquish the authoritie which he hath to his owne benefit & [Page 22] fauour L. Si st [...]its & ib. Bar. & Bald D. de dam. infect.. Neither is he againe at pleasure to be ad­mitted to that, which once hee did thinke fit to re­nounce L. Si q [...]s iusia­randum. c. de reb. cr [...]d.. And as a priuate man may altogether abā ­don his free estate, and subiect himselfe to seruile condition Inst. de iur. Per­son., so may a multitude passe away both their authoritie and their libertie by publike consent.

The second is by prescription and custome, which is of strength in all parts of the world, least matters should alwaies float in vncertaintie, and controuer­sies remaine immortall L. 1. de vsucap.. And that this authoritie of the people may be excluded by prescription, it is euident by this one reason, which may be as one in a third place of Arithmeticke, in standing for a hun­dred. Euerie thing may be prescribed, wherein pre­scription is not prohibited L. vlt. C. de praesc. long. temp. I. sicut c. de praesc. 30. ann.: but there is no lawe which prohibiteth prescription in this case; and therefore it followeth that it is permitted. And gene­rallie, custome doth not only interpret law L. Si de inter­pretatione. D. de Ll., but cor­recteth it, and supplieth where there is no lawe L. Omnes po­puli. De iust. & sur. l. Sed & ca. D. de legib.: in somuch as the common lawe of England, as well in publick as priuate controuersies, is no other (a fewe maximes excepted) but the common custome of the Realme. Baldus saith e. 1. de Feud., that custome doth lead suc­cession in principalities, which Martinus c. 1. de ali. Feud. adui­seth to fixe in memorie, because of the often change of Princes: and the particular custome of euerie na­tion is at this day, the most vsuall and assured law be­tweene the Prince and the people. And this doe th [...] Emperours Honorius and Arcadius L. Testaments omnia. C. de test., in these wordes cōmand punctuallie to be obserued: Mos namque re­tinendus est fidelissimae vetustatis: the custome of faith­ful antiquitie must be retained: which place is to this [Page 23] sense ballanced by Pau. Gastrensis, Frane. Aretinus, and Phil. Corneus; who termeth it a morall text. The like whereto is found also in the Canon lawe, c Ridiculum 12 di.: and noted by the Glossographer in c Quanto de transl., ral., Archidiaeonus in c Domino. 50. di., Romanus in L. [...]ive [...]o D. de sol. Mat., and Cepola. Neither were the Fathers of the Nicene councel of other opinion, who thus decreed: Let auncient customes stand in strength [...].: Whereto also agreeth that old verse of Ennius, in tract. de im­per

which is cited by Saint Austin De ciuit. D [...]. lib. 2. cap. 21.; and esteemed by Cicero lib. 3. de repub. both for breuitie and truth, as an oracle. To the same sense Periander of Corinth said [...]., that old lawes and new meates were fittest for vse: which say­ing Phauorinus in Gellius did in this manner a lit­tle vary: Liue after the passed manner, speake after the present Viue moribus praelentibus, lo­quere verbis prae­sentibus.. Hereto also pertaineth that edict of the censors mentioned by Suetonius Lib. de clar. thetor., & Aul. Gel­lius Lib. 15. c. 11. & lib. 1. cap. 10.: Those things which are beside the custome and fashion of our Elders, are neither pleasing, nor to be ad­iudged right Quae praeter consuetudinem & morem maio­rum fiu [...]t, neque placen [...], neque iecta videntur.. Of this point I shall haue occasion more particularlie hereafter to write.

The third meanes whereby the people may loose their authoritie, is by way of conquest. For how­soeuer Saint Augustine 4. de ciuit., and after him Alciate 5. Cons. 132., doe disallowe ambition of enlarging Empire; and tearme warres vpon this cause great theeueries Grandia latro­cinia.: Whereupon Lucane lib. 10., and his vncle Seneca 1. de benesie., called Alexander the Great, a great robber of the world Orbis terratū praedo., Yet there is no doubte but the sentence of victorie, [Page 24] especiallie if the war was vndertakē vpon good cause (as the conqueror being made his own arbitrator wil hardlie acknowledge the contrarie) is a iust title of acquisition l. Postliminium D. de captiu.; reducing the vanquished, their priuile­ges, liberties and whole estate, vnder the discretion of him that is victorious. Caesar sayth; He geueth all that denieth right Arma tenenti omnia dat qui iu­sta negar.: which sentence is approoued by Couaruuias Reg. peccatum p. [...]. §. 9.; affirming, that the victor maketh all which his sword tou [...]heth to be his owne. So sayth Baldus in rub. C. de la. Ii., that he doth his pleasure vpon the vanqui­shed: and againe Caesar in the speech of Ariouistus Vt qui vicissent, iis quos vicissent, quemadmodu [...] velint impera­rent.; it is the law of armes, that the victorious should com­mād those whom they haue subdued, euen as they please. Clemens Alexandrinus saith [...]irom. 1., the goods of enemies are taken away by right of warre. Isocrates Archid. hath written, that the Lacedaemonians did by title of victorie in this sort maintaine their right. We hold this land gi­uen by the posteritie of Hercules, confirmed by the O­racle of Delphos, the inhabitantes thereof being ouer­come by warre. Which was not much vnlike that which Iephte captaine of Israell expostulated with the Ammonites Iudic. 11.23. & 24.. Are not those things thine which Chamos thy God hath possessed? but whatsoeuer the Lord our God hath conquered, pertaineth vnto vs. Yea, God doth expressely giue to the people of Israel, the cities which they should subdue Deut. 20.; some into ful pos­session, others into seruitude & subiection: by which title Iacob also had giuen to Ioseph his partage among his brethrē, euen the land which he had taken frō the Amorites with his sword and with his bow Gen 48, 12.. It was vsuall to the Romans, and as Appian saith 1. Ciu., iust, to retaine principall or direct dominion, in al thinges [Page 25] which they brought vnder the sway of their sworde. Brissonius 4. de form. hath collected certaine examples of the forme of yeelding vnto the Romans, whereby al pro­phane & sacred, al humane and diuine matters were submitted vnto them.

Seeing therefore that the people may so many wayes loose both their power and their right in af­faires of state, is not your ignorance aduenturous so generallie to affirme, that if no one forme of gouer­ment bee naturall, there is no doubt but the people haue power both to alter and limit the same, as they please? Can no lawe, no custome, no conquest re­straine them? Your pen doth range, and your iudge­ment rage beyond al compasse and course of reason. You should haue said, that there is no doubt, but if by al or any of these meanes, the right both of succes­sion and gouernment be setled in one familie, accor­ding to propinquitie and prioritie of bloud, the peo­ple may neither take away nor varie the same: and if they doe, they commit iniustice, they violate the law of nations, whereby they expose themselues, not on­lie to the infamie and hate of al men, but to the re­uenge of those who wil attempt vppon them. For it is not onlie lawfull but honourable, for any people, either to right or reuenge the breach of this lawe; a­gainst them which contemne it, as monsters; against them who knowe it not, as beasts. Saint Augustine saith v. de ciuit.; If a Citie vppon earth should decree some great mischiefes to be done, by the decree of mankind it is to be destroied. And as in the state of one countrey any man may accuse vpon a publicke crime Inst. de pob. iud., so in the state of the world, any people may prosecute a com­mon [Page 26] offence: for as there is a ciuill band among all the people of one nation; so is there a natural knot a­mong al men in the world.

You close your conclusion with this conceit, that the word naturall Prince, or naturall successor, is to be vnderstood of one, who is borne within the same Realme, and that it is ridiculous to take it, as though anie prince had natural interest to succeed. But what construction wil you then make of that which Herodi­an deliuereth Herod. lib. 1., in the speech of Commodus the sonne of Marcus? Now hath fortune giuen me vnto you for prince in his stead, not drawen into the state, such as they were, who were before me; nor as one that glorieth in the purchase of the Empire▪ for I onlie am borne vnto you and brought vp in the court, neuer swathed in priuate cloathes, but so soone as I was borne the imperiall pur­pure did receiue me, and the sun beheld me at once, both a man and a prince. Consider these things, Ture principem [...]olite, non datū, sed [...]atum. and honour your prince by right, who is not giuen, but borne vnto you. Girard Lib. 1 del [...]e­ [...]ate de France. goeth further in writing of Charles the Simple, that he was king before he was born. Say therefore againe, that it is ridiculous to take the word natural prince, for one that hath right of succession inherent in him by birth; and I wil say that this mirth wil better beseeine a natural indeede, then any man that is wise. But let vs now consider the further pas­sage of your discourse; both how you are able to for­tifie this foundation, and what building it is able to beare.

IN this chapter you spend much speech in praising a monarchie, and preferring it before the gouernment of manie; which you doe to no other end, but to insinuate your selfe either into credit, or aduantage to drawe it downe▪ euen as Ioab presented Amasa with a kind kisse, to winne thereby opportunitie to stab him 2 Sam. 10.. For in the end Fol. 21. you fetch about, that because a Prince is subiect, as other men, not onely to er­rours in iudgement, but also to passionate affections, in his will; it was necessarie, that as the common wealth hath giuen that great power vnto him, so it should assigne him helpes for managing the same. And that a Prince receiueth his authoritie from the people, you proue a little before Pag. 17., for that Saint [Page 28] Peter tearmeth kings Humane creatures 1. Pet. 2., which you interpret to bee, a thing created by man; be­cause by mans free choise, both this forme of go­uernment is erected, and the same also laide vpon some particular person.

I know not in what sort to deale with you, con­cerning this interpretation. Shall I labour to im­pugne it by arguments? Why, there is no man that wanteth not either iudgement or sinceritie, but vpon both the naturall and vsuall sense of the words, hee will presently acknowledge it to bee false. Shall I go about either to laugh, or to raile you from your errour, as Cicero in the like case perswaded to doe? But this would bee agreeable neither to the stayednesse of our yeeres, nor the grauitie of our professions. I am now aduised what to doe; I will appeale, as Machetes did before Philip of Mace­don Plutarch. in probl., from your selfe asleepe, to your selfe awake; from your selfe distempered by affection, to your selfe returned to sobrietie of sense. Do you thinke then in true earnest, that a humane creature is a thing created by man, or rather that euery man is a humane creature? Is a brutish creature to be ta­ken for a thing created by a beast? Spirituall, Angeli­call, or anie other adiunct vnto creature, what refe­rence hath it to the Authour of creation? And if it were so, then should al creatures be called diuine, be­cause they were created by God, to whom onely it is proper to create; and in this verie point, Saint Paul saith Rom. 13., that all authoritie is the ordinance and institution of God. Neither needeth it to trouble vs that Saint Peter should so generally inioine vs [Page 29] to be obedient to all men, no more then it troubled the Apostles, when Christ commanded them to preach to all creatures Marc. 16.; according to which com­mission, Saint Paul did testifie Col. 1.23., that the Gospell had beene preached to euerie creature vnder hea­uen: but Saint Peter doth specifie his generall speech, and restraine his meaning to kings and go­uernours; in which sense Saint Ambrose Ad Auxentib. citeth this place, as it followeth: Bee subiect to your Lords, vvhether it bee to the king, as to the most excellent, &c.

This interpretatiō not only not relieuing you, but discouering very plainly either the weaknesse or cor­ruption of your iudgement, it resteth vpon your bare word, that kings haue receiued their first authoritie from the people; which although I could denie, with as great both countenance & facilitie, as you affirme, yet will I further charge vpon you with strength of proofe.

Presently after the inundation of the world, we find no mention of politike gouernement, but onely of oeconomical, according as men were sorted in fami­lies: for so Moses hath written Gen. 10.5, that of the progenie of Iapheth, the Iles of the Gentiles were deuided after their families. The first, who established go­uernment ouer manie families, was Nimrod the sonne of Cush, accounted by Saint Chrysostome Hom. in Gen. the first King: which authoritie hee did not ob­taine by fauour and election of anie people, but by plaine purchase of his power. Heereupon Moses calleth him a mightie Hunter Gen. 10.9., which is a forme of speech among the Hebrues, whereby they signifie [Page 30] a spoiler or oppresser. And this doth also appeare by the etymologie of his name; for Nimrod signifieth a rebell, a transgressour, and as some interpret it, a terrible Lord: and names were not imposed in aun­cient times by chance or at aduenture, as Plato in Cratylo., one of natures chiefe secretaries, and among the Latin writers Aul. Gellius [...]oct. Attic. 9. cap. 4. doe affirme.

Many hold opiniō, that this Nimrod was the same, whom the Grecians cal Ninus: which seemeth to be confirmed by that which Moses saith Gen. 10., that hee did build the Citie of Niniue. Of this Ninus, Iustine wri­teth Ninus primus dicrut bello par­ta retinuisse, cum priores contenti victoria▪ imperio abstinuissent. Iust. 1. that he was the first who held that which hee did subdue; others, satisfied with victorie, aspired not to beare rule. Nimrod foūded the empire of the Assy­rians, which continued by succession in his posterity, vntil it was violently drawn frō Sardanapalus to the Medes. From them also Cyrus by subuersion of A­styages did transport it to the Persians; and from them againe the Grecians did wrest it by conquest. After the death of Alexander, his captaines without any consent of the people, made partition of the empire among them; whose successors were afterwards sub­dued by the armies and armes of Rome. And this empire, beeing the greatest that euer the earth did beare, was in the end also violentlie distracted, by di­uers seueral either conquests or reuolts. Leo After wri­teth, that it is not a hundred yeares, since the people of Gaoga in Africk had neither king nor Lord, vntill one hauing obserued the greatnesse and maiestie of the king of Tombute, did enterprise to attaine so­ueraigntie aboue them; which by violence he effe­cted, and left the same to his posteritie. And be­cause [Page 31] I will not bee tedious in running through particulars, giue you an instance of anie one peo­ple, which hath not diuers times receiued, both Prince and gouernment by absolute constraint, Et Phillidasolus habeto; and I will yeeld to all that you affirme. But failing herein, you shall bee enforced to confesse, that in manie, yea in most, if not in all countries, the people haue receiued libertie, either from the graunt or permission of the victorious Prince, and not the prince authoritie from the vanquished people.

What helpes nowe doe you imagine, that the people haue assigned to their Prince?

The first, you affirme to be the direction of lawes. But it is euident, that in the first heroicall ages, the people were not gouerned by anie positiue lawe, but their kings did both iudge and commaund, by their word, by their will, by their absolute power; and, as Pomponius saith l. 2. de orig. iur., Omnia manu a reg [...]bus gu­bernabantur: Kings gouerned all things: without ei­ther restraint or direction, but onely of the lawe of nature.

The first lawe was promulged by Moses; but this was so long before the lawes of other nations, that Iosephus writeth Contra Appia­num., It was more ancient then their gods: affirming also, that the word Law is not found in Homer, or in Orpheus, or in anie Writer of like antiquitie. Of this law of nature Homer maketh men­tion in these words:

[Page 32] And againe,

And of the iustice of kings he writeth in this maner.

In which verses Chrysostome affirmeth lib. 2. de regno. by the iudg­ment of Alexander, that Homer hath delineated the perfect image of a King: but that hee maketh mention of anie positiue lawes, I doe rather doubt then assuredlie denie. For Kings in auncient times did giue iudgment in person, not out of any forma­litie in lawe, but onlie according to naturall equitie. Virgil saith Aeneid, [...].:

Which he doth also affirme of Aeneas Aeneid. 3., Dido Aeneid. 1. and of Alcestes Aeneid. 5.. The like doth Herodotus report lib. [...]. of Midas king of Phrygia, who consecrated his tribunall to Apollo: and the like also dooth Plutarch in Apopht, of diuers [Page 33] kings of Macedonia: Philarchus affirmeth in Athe­naeus, that the kings of Persia had palme trees and vines of goulde, vnder which they did sit to heare causes.

But because it grew both troublesome & tedious, for al the people to receiue their right from one man At cum ius ae­quabile ab [...]no viro homines non conseque­rentur, inuentae sunt leges. Offic. 2.; lawes were inuented, as Cicero saith, and offi­cers also appointed to execute the same.

Another original of lawes was thus occasioned: When anie people were subdued by armes, lawes were laid like logs vpon their necks, to keepe them in more sure subiection: which both because it is not doubtful, and to auoid prolixitie, I will manifest on­lie by our owne example.

When the Romans had reduced the best part of this Iland into the forme of a prouince; as they per­mitted libertie of lawe to no other countrie vnder their obedience, so here also they planted the prac­tise of their lawes: and for this purpose they sent o­uer manie professors, and among others Papinian, the most famous both for knowledge and integri­tie, of all the authors of the ciuill lawe. Againe, when the Saxons had forced this Realme, and par­ted it into seauen kingdomes, they erected so ma­nie settes of law; of which onelie two were of con­tinuance, the Mercian lawe; and the West Saxon law. After these the Danes became victorious; and by these newe Lordes new lawes were also impo­sed, which bare the name of Dane-lawe. Out of these three lawes, partlie moderated, partlie supplied, King Edward the confessor composed that bodie of lawe, which afterwardes was called [Page 32] [...] [Page 33] [...] [Page 34] Saint Edwards lawes. Lastly, the Normans brought the land vnder their power; by whom Saint Edwards lawes were abrogated, and not onlie new lawes, but newe language brought into vse; in somuch as all pleas were formed in French; and in the same tongue children were taught the principles of Grammar. These causes wee find of the beginning of lawes; but that they were assigned by the people for assistance and direction to their kinges, you bring neither ar­gument, nor authoritie for proofe; it is a part of the drosse of your owne deuise.

The second helpe, which you affirme that com­mon wealthes haue assigned to their kings, is by parliaments and priuie councelles. But Parliaments in al places haue bin erected by kings; as the par­liament of Paris and of Montpellier in Fraunce, by Philip the Faire; the parliament in England by Hen­rie the first; who in the sixteenth yeare of his raigne Ann. 1116., called a councell of all the states of his realme at Salisburie, which our Historiographers do take for the first Parliament in England; affirming that the kings, before that time, did neuer call the common people to counsell. After this the priuie councell at the instance of the Archbishop of Canterburie, was also established; and since that time, the counsellors of state haue alwaies bin pla­ced by election of the Prince. And that it was so likewise in auncient times, it appeareth by tha [...] which Homer writeth: [...] First hee established a councell of honorable old men: And likewise by Virgill.

I will passe ouer your course, foggio, drow­sie conceite, that there are few or none simple mo­narchies in the world, (for it would tire: any [...]to toyle after your impertinent errours) and wil now rip vp your packet of examples, whereby you inde­uour to shew, that the power of kings hath bin bride­led by their subiects. But what do you infer hereby? What can you inforce? will you rake ouer al histo­ries for examples of rebellion, and then argue, a facto ad ius; that euerie thing is lawful which you finde to haue bin done? Iustinian sayth: Non exemplis, sed le­gibus iudicandum l. 13. C. de sen. & interloc. om. iud.: We must iudge facts by lawe, and not lawe by facts, or by examples: which Alci­ate 5. Cons. 33. & 6 50. and Deciane 3.100. do terme a golden lawe; because there is no action either so impious or absurd, which may not bee paralleled by examples. Will you prooue it lawful to vse fleshlie familiaritie with the sister, with the mother in law, with the natural mo­ther? You haue the example of Cambyses for the first, Caracalla for the second, Dionysius and Nero for the third. The Iewes vppon whom God had setled his choise, did at times (beside many other enormities) erect male stewes 3. Reg. 14. & 15. Of the two nations, whose ex­amples you vse, the Romans and the Lacedaemoni­ans, the first did the like vnder diuers emperours, as Lampridius writeth; and in more auncient times allowed also parricide of children Gell. lib. 5. ca. 19.: the other would sort themselues by fifteene and twentie families to­gether, and hold both wiues and goods in common. I omit the vnnatural customes of diuers other na­tions; [Page 36] and will now declare, how in straining a fewe examples to countenance your conceit, you are con­strained to beare your selfe no lesse cunning in con­cealing truthes, then bold in auouching things which are, not only vncertaine, but plainely false.

It is true which you write, that the kings of Spar­ta, by the institution of Lycurgus, were obedient to the officers called Ephori; but these were titular kings, hauing no other power but a single voice among the Senators: and because all affaires were caried by consent of the people, the estate was then esteemed popular. Afterwards Theopompus, by pretence of an Oracle, drew this authoritie from the people, to a Senate of thirtie; whereby the gouernment did change into an Aristocracie; & yet the naked name of kings was retained. By this shuffling of rule the Lacedaemonians were continually tossed with tem­pests of sedition, ceasing not to wade in their owne bloud (as before you haue acknowledged) vntill in the end they were brought into subiection; first, by the Macedonians; afterward by the Achaeans; and lastly by the Romans. I will not say now what rea­son haue we? but what a shame is it for vs, to open our cares to these Vtopicall state-writers? who be­ing mellowed in idlenesse, & hauing neither know­ledge nor interest in matters of gouernment, make new models vpon disproportioned ioints, borrowed from nations most different in rule.

You affirme by the testimonie of Liuie, that for offence taken against Romulus, because hee raigned at pleasure, and not by law, the Senators did cut him in peeces: in which short assertion many base vn­truths [Page 37] are included, beneath the degree of anie vile word. Liuie writeth that he sorted the people into order, and gouerned them by lawes Iura dedit., and that hee was also both aduised and valiant in the field; euen such a one as Homer describeth: ‘ [...]’ Both a good king, and couragious commander. Con­cerning his end, Liuie writeth, that in taking muster of his armie, a thicke tempest did arise, after which he was neuer seene; wherein he is seconded by Solinus, Eutropius and the rest: only Liuie addeth, that there was a rumor, but verie obscure, without any certaine either authour or ground; I will adde also without probabilitie, that he was torne in peeces. For howe probable is it, that such a fact, in the open view of his armie, could bee verie obscure? how probable is it also, that the people would first teare him in peeces for his iniustice, and then worship him for a God? Further, with what either confidence or conceit doe you alleage this report of Liuie, for his opiniō? I find your fetch; you apprehend euerie thing which may, if not confirm, yet countenance that doctrine, which lately you haue drawne out of Cerberus denne; That it is lawfull to contriue the death of kings.

That the people were grieued against Seruius Tullius for raigning without election: it is a meere fantasie, a dreame, a deuise. Liuie faith Tanto consen­su quanto haud qui [...]quam alius ante rex est de­claratus., that hee was declared king with such a consent, as no man had bin before him.

That Tarquinius neglected the lawes of gouern­ment prescribed to him by the common wealth, it is an ougly vntruth. Liuie saith, that he brake the aunci­ent [Page 38] manner of kings before him: but for lawes Pom­ponius affirmeth i [...]. 2. D. de orig [...]r., that at that time the Romans had no lawes but from their kings, and that Sextus Papi­rius reduced them into one volume, which was called the ciuill law of Papirius i [...]s ci [...]le [...]a­pirianum., and that when the peo­ple expelled their kings, they abrogated their lawes also, and remained twentie yeares without any law.

Lastly you adde, that the Romans did expell their kings, and erect Consuls in their steed: but you sup­presse that which followed, which I hold for a com­mon consequence of y ^e like disorder: First, that for this cause, they were presently almost ouerwhelmed with warres: secondly, that in this state, they neuer enjoy­ed long time free from sedition: lastly, that as Taci­tus saith, Nullum esse discordantis pa­trie remedium, quam vt ab vno rege [...]etur. annal [...] there was no meanes to appease these tu­mults, but by returning to a monarchie againe. All this I write, rather to manifest the maner of your dealing, then that I hold it much regardable what Romans did.

Your examples of our present age I will wrap vp in these few words. All nations, very few excepted, do consent in this forme of gouernment; first, to bee vnder one Prince; secondly, to accept him by suc­cession, according to propinquitie of bloud: in other circumstances, either for in augurating their prince, or for the maner of managing and executing his go­uernment, not two nations in the world in all points do agree. And yet is not this diuersitie raised, by any lawes which the people doe prescribe vnto their Prince, as you doe most grossely, yea peeuishly, yea maliciously affirme; but by the particular lawes [Page 39] and customes of euerie nation, in which the consent of the Prince, either secret or expresse, sometimes onely is sufficient, alwayes principally doth concur.

Vpon this diuersitie of customes you conclude, that it sufficeth not to alleage bare propinquitie of bloud. What? not where that custom is established? as I haue declared it to bee in most nations of the world? doth difference of customes make all custom void? doth diuersitie of custome in some circumstan­ces take away the principall custome of succession by bloud? This cleaueth together no surer then sand; you loose both labour and credit in obtruding vnto vs these weake and loose arguments, without either force of reason or forme of Art.

Your instance of the lawe Salicke in France, doth offer occasion to enter into a large fielde, where­in I could plainlie prooue, that there was neuer a­nie such lawe made to bind the discent of the crowne of Fraunce; and that it hath bin the custome in most parts of the world, not to exclude women from suc­cession in state: in so much as Beda in Act. cap. 8. and before him Eusebius lib. 2. cap. I., and Plinie lib. 6. cap. 29. & 30. do [...] write, that certaine people were gouerned onlie by Princes of that sex. But because this is a matter both of long discourse, and not proper to our purpose, I wil conteine my selfe within this obseruation; That the exclusion of King Edward the third from the crowne of Fraunce, vppon this pretence, was the cause of the effusion of their brauest bloud, and of the spoile, wast, and con­quest of all that Realme. I acknowedge that the English haue lost the possession of that conquest; and that was by meanes of domestical warres, for [Page 40] excluding the neerest in bloud from the crowne; into which vnquiet quarrell, you doe now endeuour againe to imbarke vs. Yet no man can assure that the miseries of Fraunce for this cause are at an end. Rammes recoile to strike harder: we are gone rather backe then away: I will not presage, but anie man may coniecture, that our minds and our meanes will not alwaies want the fauour of time.

After all this you proceede a degree further: that it is lawfull vpon iust considerations, not only to put backe the next inheritour of the crowne, but also to remoue him who is in full possession thereof. And y ^• is plaine (you say) not onely by the grounds before by you alleaged, but also by example of the Romans & Graecians: & because God hath commonlie con­curred in such iudiciall actions of the state; not onely in prospering them, but in giuing them also some notable successour. And yet you protest you are far from their opinion, who vpon euerie mislike are readie to band against their Prince; and that you esteem the tenure of a crown, if once it be setled, the most irregular, whereto euery man is bound to settle his conscience, without examination of title or interest; but onely by the supreme law of Gods dis­position, who can dispence in what he listeth: and that notwithstanding you are as farre, from the ab­iect flatterie of Billaie and others; who affirme, that Princes are subiect to no law or limitation at al, and that they succeed by nature and birth onely, and not by admission of the people; and that there is no au­thoritie vnder God to chasten them. These you call absurd paradoxes; and herewith you settle your self [Page 41] to shewe in the next Chapter, what good successe hath insued the deposition of Princes.

Concerning your protestation, wee may say vn­to you as Isaac said to his sonne Iacob Gen. 27.22. The voice is Iacobs voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau: You speake faire, and therewith also well; but the maine drift of your discourse, is nothing else but a tempe­stuous doctrine of rebellion and disorder: you being therein like the boatman, who looketh one waie and pulleth another; or rather like the image of Ia­nus, which looked two contrarie waies at once. It is a rule in lawe; That a protestation contrarie to a mans act, will not serue to relieue him Protestatio ae­tui contraria non releuat.: onlie this shal serue to conuince you, either of false or of for­getful dealing, when we come to that place where in flat words you maintaine the contrarie.

Concerning the querele which you lay against Billaie; as I haue not seene what he hath written, so wil I not interpose betweene him and you. I neuer heard of christian prince who challenged infinite au­thoritie without limitation of any law, either natural or diuine. But where you terme it an absurd para­doxe, that the people should not haue power to chasten their Prince, and vpon iust considerations to remoue him; I am content to ioine with you vppon the issue.

And first I note the maner of your dealing, in that you haue omitted to expresse what these iust consi­derations may be. For seeing there hath bin no king, who is not noted of some defects; and againe, no Tyrant, who hath not manie commendable partes (as Plutarch writeth In Dionys. that Dionysius excelled most princes in diuers pointes of iustice and vertue) it [Page 42] is a matter of dangerous consequence, to leaue these considerations vndetermined and at large. But who seeth not, that you do it out of pollicie, that you may vpon euerie particular occasion, declare such causes to be sufficient as you please?

How then doe you proue, that vpon anie cause, the people haue power to dispossesse their prince? This is plaine (you say) not onlie by the groundes before by you alleaged, but also by example of y ^• Ro­mans & Graecians. The grounds by you alleaged, are two. One in your first Chapter, that because no one forme of gouernment is natural, the people haue power both to choose, and to change, and to limit it as they please. The other ground is in this Chapter; that because there are diuers lawes and customes in matters of principalitie, it sufficeth not to alleage bare propinquitie of bloud.

Why; but had you no text of scripture, no Fa­ther of the Church to alleage? No lawe? No rea­son? No better example? No surer grounde? It is more then this which you bring against your selfe, in citing out of Saint Peter 2. ca. 2.10.; The Lord knoweth to reserue the vniust vnto the daie of iudgement; and es­peciallie them that despise gouernment, and speake euill of those that are in dignitie. And out of Saint Iude ver. 8.: Likewise these dreamers despise gouernment, and speake euill of them that are in authoritie. Besides also, you haue alleaged out of Saint Rom. [...] 3. Paule: Let euerie soule be subiect vnto the higher power; for there is no power but of God: Whosoeuer therefore resisteth the power, resi­steth the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receiue to themselues iudgment. And likewise out of S. Peter: 1. ca. 2 ver. 13 Submit your selues to euerie humane creature, [Page 43] whether it be to the king, or vnto gouernors; for so is the will of God. To which places we maie likewise ad that, which S. Paule did write vnto Titus Tit. 3.1.: Put them in remembrance that they be obedient to the principalities & powers. And writing to Timothy 1. Tim. 2.2. he exhorteth vs also to praie for them, that we may leade vnder them a peaceable life.

But perhaps you wil say, that the Apostles did not meane this of wicked princes. Trifler: the Apostles spake generallie of al: Saint. Peter 1. Pet. 2.18. maketh expresse mention of euil Lords. And what princes haue euer bin more either irreligious or tyrannical, then Cali­gula, Tiberius, Nero, the infamie of their ages, vnder whose empire the Apostles did both liue and write.

Bellarmine the great master of controuersies per­ceiuing this to be vnanswerablie true, did in another sort rather cut then vntie the knot: affirming In tract. de. ex­emp. clericorum. that at that time it was necessarie to admonish the Christi­ans to performe obedience to their kings, least the preaching of the Gospel might otherwise be hindred: which is as if in direct tearmes he should haue saide. Sir Kings: whilest our heads were vnder your girdle, we were content to curry fauour, by preaching obe­diēce vnto the people: but now we haue got the wind of you; we must plainlie tel you, that you hold your crownes at their curtesie and fauour; and haue no power in effect, but as lieutenants general. I know you wil make a sower face at this; it will go very much against your stomackes; but there is no reme­die, you must take it down; they are your good lords; they may dispossesse you.

Prophane Bellarmine: is Christian Religion a meere policie? doth it applie it selfe onlie to the pre­sent? [Page 44] Doth it turne alwaies with the time? May the principal professors thereof say, as an infidel Moore did, whē he violated the faith which he had gi­uen vnto christians? We haue no bone in our tongues that we cannot turne them which way we please. Wee seee plainlie that you say so: and it is as plaine, that it was far from the true meaning of the Apostles. S. Iude ver. 16. writeth sharpelie against those, who had mens per [...]ons in admiration because of aduvntage. S. Paul also saith Galat. 1.10.: Goe I about to please men? If I should please men, I were not then the seruant of Christ.

I wil giue you an example of another time. Nabu­chadnezzar king of Assyria, wasted al Palestina; tooke Hierusalem; slew the king; burnt the Temple; tooke away the holy vessels and treasure: the residue he per­mitted to the crueltie and spoile of his vnmerciful soldiers; who defiled al places with rape, ruine and bloud. After the glut of this butcherie, the people which remained, he led captiue into Chaldaea, and there commaunded, that whosoeuer refused to wor­ship his golden image, should be cast into a firie fur­nace.

What crueltie, what impietie is comparable to this? and yet the Prophets Ieremiah ca. 29.7. and Baruch ca. 1.11. did write to those captiue Iewes, to praie for the pros­peritie and life of him, and of Baltazar his sonne, that their daies might be vpon earth as the daies of heauen: and Ezechiel ca. 17. both blameth and threatneth Zedechia, for his disloialtie in reuolting from Nabu­chadnezzar, whose homager and tributarie he was. What answere wil you make to this example? I am wiselie busied to cast forth this question; what an­swere can you make, which your owne knowledg [Page 45] will not conuince?

Many other places there are in holy Scripture, whereby not onely our actions are tied to obe­dience; He that doth presumptuously against the ruler of the people shal die Deut. 17.12.: but also our words, Thou shalt not speake euill against the ruler of the people Exod. 22.28. Act. 23.5.; yea, our se­cret thoughts: Detract not from the king, no not in thy thought; for the foules of the aire shall carie thy voice Eccles. 10.20.. The reason hereof is not obscure: Because princes are the immediat ministers of God Rom. 13.; & therefore he called Nabuchadnezzar, his seruant Ierem. 25.9.; & promised him also hire & wages for the seruice which he did Ezech. 29.18.. And the Prophet Esay cap. 25. calleth Cyrus, a prophane & heathen king, the Lords annointed. For, as Salomon saith Prou. 21.1., The harts of kings are in the hands of the Lord: & he stirreth vp the spirit, euen of wicked Princes to do his wil 2. Chron. 36.22.: & (as Iehoshaphat said to his rulers 2. Chron. 19.8.) they ex­ecute not the will of man, but of the Lord.

In regard hereof Dauid calleth thē gods Psal. 82.; whereof Plato also had some sense, when he said [...] in polit., A king is in steed of god. And if they do abuse their power, they are not to be iudged by their subiects, as being both in­feriour and naked of authoritie, because all iurisdi­ction within their realme is deriued from thē, which their presence only doth silence & suspend: but God reserueth them to the [...]orest trial: Horribly and sodain­ly (saith the wise man Sap. 6.) will the Lord appeare vnto thē, and a hard iudgment shal they haue.

You Iesuits do yeeld a blindfold obediēce to your superiours, not once examining either what hee is, or what he doth commād: & although the Pope should swarue frō iustice, yet by the canons Extrauag. Vnā sanctam. de maio, & obed,, men are bound to performe obedience vnto him, and God only may [Page 46] iudge his doings: and may a king, the Lords Lieute­nant, the Lords annointed in the view of his subiects, nay, by the hands of his subiects, bee cast out of state? May he, as was Actaeon, be chased and wooried by his own hounds? Wil you make him of worse conditiō, then the Lord of a Manor? then a parish priest? then a poore schoolemaster, who cannot be remoued by those that are vnder their authoritie and charge?

The law of God cōmandeth that the child should die, for anie contumely done vnto the Parents. But what if the father be a robber? if a murtherer? if for all excesse of villanies odious & execrable both to God and man? Surely hee deserueth the highest degree of punishment; & yet must not the son lift vp his hand against him: for, as Quintilian saith in declam., No offence is so great, as to be punished by parricide. But our country is dearer to vs then our selues Cic. offic. lib. 1: & the Prince is the fa­ther of our country Pater patriae.: whose authoritie, as Baldus no­teth in l. senium. C. qui test. fa. poss., is greater then of parents: and therfore he must not be violated, how impious, how imperious soe­uer he be.

If hee commaundeth those things that are lawfull, we must manifest our obedience by readie performing. If he inioine vs those actions that are e­uill; we must shew our subiection by patient endu­ring. It is God only who seateth kings in their state; it is he only who may remoue them. The Lord wil set a wise king ouer the people which he loueth, as himselfe doth testifie 2. Chron. 1.. And againe, For the sins of the land the kings are changed Prou 28.2. 2. Chron. 28.6.. As therefore wee endure with pa­tience vnseasonable weather, vnfruitful yeares, & o­ther like punishments of God; so must wee tolerate the imperfections of Princes, and quietly expect ei­ther [Page 47] reformation, or els a change.

This was the doctrine of the ancient Christians, euen against their most mortall persecuters. Tertul­lian saith Apolog. 37., For what warre are we not both seruiceable and readie, although vnequall in number, who doe so willingly endure to be slaine? neither want we strength of number: but God forbid, that religion should be main­tained with humane fire. From him also Saint Cypri­an, a most studious reader of Tertullian, as Saint Hie­rome de sacr. ec. Tert. noteth, in like maner writeth Ad Demet.: Although our people bee exceeding copious, yet it doth not reuenge it selfe against violence: it suffreth. Saint Augustin saith [...]actum socie­tatis humanae ge­nerale regibus o­bedire. Confes. lib. 2.: It is a generall paction of humane societie to obey kings. Which sentence is assumed into the body of the ca­non law Dist. 8. c. qu [...] contra.. In a word, the current of the ancient fathers is in this point concurrent; insomuch as among thē all there is not one found, not anie one; one is a small number; and yet I say confidently againe, there is not anie one, who hath let fall so loose a speech, as may be strained to a contrarie sense: How then are you of late become, both so actiue & resolute to cut in sun­der the reines of obedience, the verie sinewes of go­uernment & order? Whence had Benedetto Palmto, a Iesuite, his warrant, to incite William Parrie to vnder­take the parricide of our Queene? whence did Anni­bal Codretto, another Iesuite, assure him, that the true Church made no question, but that the fact was law­full? Whence did Guignard, a Iesuite, terme the but­cherie of Henry late king of Fraunce, an heroicall act, and a gift of the holy Ghost? Whence did he write of the king, who now there raigneth: If without armes he cannot be deposed, let men take armes against him; if by warre it cannot be accomplished, let him bee murthe­red? [Page 48] Whence did Ambrose Verade, rector of the colledge of the Iesuits in Paris, animate Barriers (as he confessed) to sheath his knife in the kings breast; assuring him by the liuing God, that he could not execute anie act more meritorious? Whence did the commenter vpon the epitome of Confessions, other­wise the seuenth booke of decretals, commend all the Iesuits in these termes Tyrannos ag­gred untur, lolium ab agro domini­co [...]u [...]llunt., They set vpon tyrants, they pull the cockle out of the Lords field?

It is a rule in nature, that one contrarie is manife­sted by the other. Let vs compare then your boiste­rous doctrine with that of the Apostles, and ancient Fathers of the Church, and we shall find that the one is like the rough spirit, which hurled the heard of swine headlong into the sea Matt. 8.; the other like the stil & soft spirit which talked with Elias 1. Reg. 19..

Neither was the diuel euer able, vntil in late decli­ning times, to possesse the hearts of Christians with these cursed opinions, which doe euermore beget a world of murthers, rapes, ruines & desolations. For tel me, what if the prince, whom you perswade y ^e people they haue power to depose, be able to make & main­taine his partie, as K. Iohn and king Henry the third did against their Barons? What if other princes, whom it doth concerne, as wel in honor, to see the law of Na­tions obserued, as also in policie, to breake those pro­ceedings which may form precedents against them­selues, do adioin to the side? what if whilest the prince and the people are (as was the frog and the mouse) in the heate of their encounter, some other potentate play the kite with them both; as the Turke did with the Hungarians? Is it not then a fine peece of poli­cie which you doe plotte? or is it not a grosse [Page] errour to raise these daungers, and to leaue the de­fence to possibilities doubtfull.

Goe too, Sirs, goe too, there is no christian coun­try, which hath not by your deuises ben wrapped in warres. You haue set the empire on swim with bloud: your fires in France are not ye: extinguished: in Po­lonia & all those large countries, extending from the north to the east, you haue caused of late more battels to be fought, then had ben in 500 yeers before. Your practises haue heeretofore preuailed against vs: of late yeers you haue busied your selues in no one thing more, then how to set other christian princes on our necks; stirring vp such store of enemies against vs, as, like the grashoppers of Egipt, Exod. 10. might fill our houses, and couer our whole land, and make more doubt of roome then of resistance. Our owne people also you haue prouoked to vnnaturall attempts: you haue exposed our country as a pray, to them that will either inuade or betray it; supposing belike that you play Christs part well, when you may say as Christ did, Math. 10.34. thinke not that I came to send peace, I came not to send peace but a sword. But when by the power & prouidēce of God, all these attempts haue rather shewen what good hearts you beare towards vs, then done vs any great harme; when in all these practises you haue mis­sed the mark, now you do take another [...]ime: now ha­uing no hope by extremitie of armes, you indeuour to execute your mallice by giuing dangerous aduise: Now you goe about to entangle vs with titles, which is the greatest miserie that can [...]all vpon a state.

You pretend faire shewes of libertie & of power, Sed timeo Danaos & don [...] ferentes: Wee cannot but suspect [Page] the courtesies of our enemies: the power which you giue vs will pull vs downe; the libertie whereof you speake will fetter vs in bondage. When Themistocles came to the Persian court, Artab [...]nus captaine of the guard, knowing that hee would vse no ceremonie to their king, kept him out of presence, and said vnto him: you Grecians esteeme vs barbarous, for honouring our kings, but we Persians esteeme it the greatest honour to vs that can be. The like answere will we frame vn­to you: you Iesuits account it a bondage to be obe­dient vnto kings; but wee Christians account it the greatest meanes for our continuance both free and safe.

THat princes may bee chastised by their subiects, your proofes are two: one is drawen from certaine examples; the other from the good successe and suc­cessors which vsuallie haue fol­lowed. Surely it cannot be but [Page] that you stand in a strong conceite, either of the au­thoritie of your woord, or simplicitie of our iudge­ment; otherwise you could not bee perswaded, by these slender threds to draw any man to your opini­on. Of the force of examples I haue spoken before; there is no villanie so vile which vvanteth example. And yet most of the examples which you doe bring, are either false, or else impertinent.

For there haue beene diuers states, wherein one hath borne the name & title of king, without power of Maiestie. As the Romanes in the time of their con­sulate estate, had alwaies a priest, whom they entitled king, whose office consisted in certaine ceremonies & sacrifices, which in former times could not be per­formed but by their kings. Likewise the Lacedaemoni­ans, after Licurgus had formed their gouernment re­tained two kings, who had no greater stroke in mat­ters of state, then a single voice as other Senators. Such were in Caesars time many pettie kings of Gaule, who (as Ambiorix king of Leige confessed) were subiect to their Nobilitie, & iusticeable by them. Such are now the Emperours of Almaine; because the puissance & Maiestie of the empire pertaineth to the states, who are sworne to the empire it selfe, and not to the per­son of the Emperour. Such are also the Dukes of Venice, the soueraignetie of vvhich state is setled in the gentlemen. In these and such like gouernments, the Prince is not soueraigne, but subiect to that part of the common wealth, which retaineth the royaltie and maiestie of state, whether it be the Nobilitie, or common people: and therefore your examples drawen from them is nothing to our purpose.

[Page]Concerning successe, it cannot bee strange vnto you, that by the secret, yet iust iudgement of God, diuers, euill actions are carried with apparance of good successe The Prophet Dauid said, Psal. 73. that his tread­ings had almost slipt, by seeing the wicked to flourish in prosperitie: the prophet Ieremiah Ca. 12 1. seemed also to stagger vpon this point & it hath alwaies ben a dan­gerous stone in the way of the godly, whereat manie haue stumbled, and some fallen.

Besides, it ordinarily happeneth that good prin­ces succeede tyrants; partly because they are so in­deede, as being instructed to a better mannage of gouernment, both by the miserable life of their pre­decessors, and by the o [...]gly infamie which remai­neth after their death: partly because by meanes of the comparison they both seeme, and are reported to bee farre better then they are. Heerevpon Lampri­dius saith of Alexander Seuerus: in Alexand. I may also say, that Alexander was a good Prince by feare▪ for that Heltogab [...] ­lus his predecessor was both an euill prince, and also massa­cred and slaine. Seing therefore the reason is so mani­fest, wherefore good princes should succeede tyrants, is it not rashnesse? is it not impudencie? is it not im­pietie for vs to wade with vncleane feete into Gods secret counsells, vnknowne to the Angells, and to iustifie vpon this euent the paricide of any prince? For my part, I know not whether you shew your selfe more presumptuous in entering into this obseruati­on, or in pursuing it more idle and impure.

I will passe ouer your protestation of respect and obedience due vnto Princes: protest what you please, wee will take you for no other then a vile [Page] [...]inde of vermine, which, if it bee permitted to creepe into the bowels of any state, will gnaw the hart strings thereof in sunder. This you manifest by the course comparison which presently you annexe, that as a naturall body hath authoritie, to cure the head if it be out of tune, and reason to cut it off often­times, if it were able to take another; so a body poli­tick hath power to cure or cut off the head, if it be vn­sound. But what either will or power hath any part of the body in it selfe? what either sence for the one, or motion for the other, which proceedeth not altogether from the head? where is the reason seated which you attribute to the body, both in iudging and curing the infirmities of the head? Certaine it is, that in your cutting cure you deale like a foolish phisi­tion, who finding a body halfe taken and benummed with a palsie, cutteth off that part to cure the other, and so make sure to destroy both. You suppose belike that to enter into greater perills, is the onely remedie of present dangers. I omit to presse many points of this comparison against you, because comparisons do serue rather to illustrate then inforce: and I know not what assertion you might not easely make good, if such sencelesse prating might goe for proofe.

I come now to your particular examples, wherof the first is of King Saule; whom you affirme to be de­priued and put to death for his disobedience. Saule depriued and put to death? I neuer heard that any of his subiects did euer lift vp one thought against him. Dreamer, you will say, hee was slaine by the Philistimes: good; but who depriued him; it was God (you say) who did depriue him? You must [Page] pardon vs if vpon the sodaine wee doe not conceiue the misterie of your meaning: your vvords of depri­uation and putting to death, doe rather import a iu­diciall proceeding against him, thē that God deliue­red him to be vanquished, by his enemies in the field. But vvhat is this to dispossessing by subiects? yes, you say, because vvhat soeuer God hath put in vre in his common vvealth, may be practised by others. Why, but then also good princes may be deposed by their subiects; because God deliuered Iosiah to be slaine by the Aegiptians.

You firebrands of strife, you trumpets of sedition, you red horses vvhose sitters haue taken peace from the earth, Apoc. 6.4. how impudently doe you abuse the scrip­tures? how doe you defile them vvith your filchie fin­gers? It is most certaine that Dauid knew, both be­cause Samuel tould him, and because he had the spirit of prophesie, that God had reiected Saul, and designed him to be king in his place: yet his doctrine was alwaies, not to touch the Lords anoin [...]ed psa. 105.1. reg 24., wherto his actions vvere also answerable. For vvhen Saul did most violently persecute him, he defended him­selfe no otherwise then by flight. During this pur­suit, Saul fell twice in to his power; once he dyd not onely spare but protect him, and rebuke the pre­torian soldiers for their negligent vvatch: the other time his hart did smite him, for that he had cut a­way the lappe of his garment. Lastly, he caused the messenger to be slaine, vvho vpon request, and for pittie, had furthered (as he said) the death of that sacred King. Wee haue a precept of obedience, vvhich is the mould vvherein vvee ought to fashion [Page] our actions. God onely is superiour to princes; vvho vseth many instruments in the execution of his iu­stice, but his aucthoritie he hath committed vnto none.

Your second example is of king Amon, vvho vvas slaine (as you vvright) by his owne people; because he vvalked not in the vvayes of the Lord. This is somewhat indeed if it be true; let vs turne to the text. 4 reg. 21. Amon was xxii. yeeres ould when he began to reigne &c. and he did euill in the sight of the Lord &c. and his seruants conspired against him, & slew him in his house, and the people smote all those who conspired against king Amon, and made Iosiah his sonne king in his stead. But this is very different from that which you report. A­mon was slaine by his seruants, and not by the people; who were so far from working, that they seuerely re­uenged his death. And although Amon was euill, yet the scripture laieth not his euill for the motiue wher­vpon his seruants slue him. The diuell himselfe in al­leaging the scripture, vsed more honestie & sinceritie (if I may so terme it) then you: for he cited the very vvords, vvresting them onely to a crooked sence: but you change the vvords of the Scripture; you counterfeit Gods coine, you corrupt the recordes vvhich he hath left vs. I vvill now shake of all res­pect of ciuilitie towards you, and tell you in flat and open termes; that as one part of your asserti­on is true, that good Kings succeeded Saul and Amon; so the other part, that either they vvere, or in right could haue bene depriued and put to death by their subiects, it is a sacrilegious, a logger-headed lye.

[Page]Of your example of Romulus I haue spoken be­fore. I haue declared also how the Romanes, present­ly after the expelling of their kings, & for that cause, were almost ouerwhelmed with the weight of warre; being beaten home to the very gates of their citie. And had not Chocles by a miracle of manhood su­steined the shock of the enemies, whilest a bridge was broken behind him, the towne had bene entred and their state ruined. And wheras you attribute the inlargement of the empire, which happened many a­ges after, to this expelling of their kings, you might as well haue saide, that the rebellion against king Iohn was the cause of the victories which wee haue since had in France. I haue before declared, that the state of the Romanes vnder their consulls, was popular, ra­ther in shew, then in deede: this shew began also to end, when by the law Valeria, L. Sylla was established dictator for foure and twentie yeares. After this, the empire did mightely encrease, vntil the reigne of Tra­ian [...]; at which time all authors agree that it was most large; and yet far short of your wandring suruey, not halfe fifteene thousand miles in compasse.

In your example of Caesar, I neuer saw more vn­truthes crowded together in fewer words: you say he brake all lawes, both humane and deuine: that is one; his greatest enemies did giue of him a most honora­ble testimonie. You say he tooke all gouernment in­to his hands alone: that is two; the people by the law Seruia elected him perpetual dictator. You make his death to be an act of the state: that is three; for they who slew him, were both declared & pursued by decree of the state for publicke enemies; of whom, [Page] not any one, either died a naturall death, or liued three yeeres after; it was further decreed, that the court where he was slaine should be stopped vp, that the Ides of March should be called parricidium; & that the Senate should neuer be assembled vpon that day. You say that Augustus was preferred in his place: that is foure; and all within the compasse of sixe lines. Augustus was neuer chosen dictator; Suetonius wri­teth In Augusto, genu nixus dictaturam deprecatus est, that hee entreated the people vpon his knee, not to charge him with that office. But Augustus, Anto­nius and Lepidus did first knit in armes by the name of Triumuiri, to reuenge the death of Iulius Caesar; wher­vpon a long cruell and doubtfull warre was set vp, which continued the space of xx. yeers; first, betweene these three, and the murtherers of Caesar; then, be­tweene Lepidus, and the other two; lastly betweene Augustus & Antonius: and this was the sweet successe of the murther of Caesar.

Augustus, after his victorie was made perpetuall tribune, as Suetonius hath written In August. Dio. saith, [...]. lib. 53.that he was freed from the power of the lawes; as Pompeie al­so had beene before him. Tacitus addeth, in proam. that the people hauing their hearts broken with broiles, per­mitted him to rise into rule, and to draw by degrees the whole authoritie of the state into his handes. And so it seemeth that the royall law was not yet established, Lex regia. by which the people gaue ouer their power in gouernment: wherevpon some make good the sentence which the Senate gaue against Nere; be­cause the soueraigntie was not then by any expresse act setled in the Emperour.

But where you bring the succession of Vespasian as [Page] a good successe of this sentence against Nero, it is a vvilde and witlesse vntruth. Galba succeeded next after Nero; who was slaine in a sedition raised by Otho. Otho againe was ouercome in field by Vitellius; wher­vpon hee slue himselfe. Lastly, Vitellius was ouer­throwne and slaine by the Captaines of Vespasian; who was the fourth Emperour after Nero. These intestine warres, these open battailes fought to the full, this slaughter of Emperours, which you terme interludes, vvere the immediate successe after the death of Nero. You furies of hell, whose voices are lightening and thunder, vvhose breathing is nothing but sword, fire, rages and rebellions: the encountring of armies, the butcherie of millions of men, the massacre of prin­ces, you accompt enterludes: These are your plea­sures; these your recreations. I hope all christian com­mon vvealthes vvill beare an eye ouer your inclina­tion, and keepe out both your persons and perswasi­ons, from turning their state into an open stage for the acting of these enterludes.

You continue your base bouldnesse in affirming, that the senate procured the death of Domitian; that they requested the soldiers to kil Heliogabalus; that they inuited Constantine to come & doe iustice vpon Max­entius: this broken kinde of disguising is familiar vnto you, to make such violencies as haue often preuailed against excellēt princes, to seeme to be the act of the vvhole state. And vvheras you bring the succession of Alexander Seuerus for a good successe of the murther of Heliogabalus, being the rarest prince (you say) that euer the Romanes had; you might haue alleaged any author in proofe thereof better then Herodian, vvho [Page] vvriteth of him in this manner. lib. 6. Alexander did beare the name and ensignes of the empire; but the administration of affaires & gouernment of the state did rest vpon wemen. And further he vvriteth that by his slacknesse and cowardice, the Romane Armie vvas defeated by the Persians; & finally, that for his vvant of courage, he vvas slaine by his owne soldiers. By this vve may see that you goe blindfold; being so far from caring, that many times you scarce know vvhat you vvright. Your markable example (as you terme it) of y ^e change o [...] the empire, frō the west to the east; frō Cōstantin the sixt, to Charles king of France, doth mark out nothing more vnto vs, then your foūdred iudgemēt. The que­stiō is not what one forren prince may do against ano­ther, but what subiects may do against their soueraign: this is the point of cōtrouersie, heete you must cloase; and not trauerse about in discourses impertinent.

The change of the kingdome of France from Chil­deric to Pepin, your owne authour Girard lib. 1. de l'sta [...]e de France.affirmeth to be, both an ambitious & fraudulēt vsurpation, wherin Pepin vsed the reuerēce of religiō as a mantle to couer his impietie & rebelliō. The matters which he obiect­ed against Childeric were two; first, his insufficiēcie, the ordinarie pretence of most rebellions; but Girard, Ibidem. saith, that the auncient custome of the French was, to loue & honor their kings, whether sufficient or vn­able, worthie or weake; & that the name of king vvas esteemed sacred, by whomsoeuer it was borne. Se­condly he obiected, that his subiects were condicio­nally sworne vnto him; & this also Girard writeth to be a forced and cautelous interpretation, violently streining the words of their oath to his aduantage: and in deede, if the oath of the people had ben con­ditionall, [Page] vvhat needed they to procure a dispensati­on for the same? This vvas the first act (saith he) wher­by the popes tooke occasion to set in their foot of au­thoritie, for transporting of kingdoms from one race to another: which growing to strength, hath filled all christian countries with confusion and tumult.

Likewise the change of that kingdome from the line of Pepin to the line of Capet, vvas a meere violence & intrusion, & so vvas it acknowledged by Eudes earle of Paris, the first of that family vvho did vsurp Girard. fo 52.: & for that cause he was constreined after two yeares reigne, to quit the crowne, & to giue place vnto Charles the lawfull heire. And vvhen Robert, brother vnto Eudes, did enter into armes to recouer that vvhich his bro­ther once held, he vvas beaten downe and slaine by the faithfull subiects of king Charles. Hugh, the sonne of Robert nourished this ambition: But Hugh Capet his sonne vvith better both opportunitie & successe, but no better right, did accomplish the enterprise. For Gi­rard Fo [...] 58. de l'state. calleth him an vsurper, & Charles duke of Lor­rane the true heire to the crowne. Between these two (as in all vsurpations it is vsuall) vvar vvas raised; but by the vnsearchable iudgement of God the duke of Lorraine vvas cast to the ground. And there is little doubt, but, if he had preuailed, Lorraine had bene at this day a member of the crowne of France.

The like answer may be giuen to your example of Suintilla: & this beside; that the kingdom of the Gothes in Spaine, vvas not then setled in succession, & chiefly during the reigne of Victeric, Gundemir, Sisebuth, Suin­tilla, Sicenand, Cinthilla, and Tulca.

The historie of Alphonso, another of your exam­ples, [Page] standeth thus. Alphonso had a sonne called Ferdi­nand, who died during the life of his father, & left two yong sons behinde him. After the death of Ferdinand, his yonger brother Sancho practised with D. Lope Diaz de Haro Lord of Biscay, to procure him to be aduanced to the successiō of the kingdom, before his nephewes. D. Lope vndertoke the deuise; & drawing some other of the nobilitie to the partie, they so wrought with the king, that in an assembly of the states at Segouia, Sancho was declared successor, & the childrē of Ferdinand ap­pointed to be kept in prison. But Sancho, either impa­tiēt to linger in expectatiō, or suspicious that his father grew inclinable towards his nephewes, made league with Mahomed Mir, king of Granado, a Moore; by whose ayde, & by the nobilitie of his faction, he caused him selfe to be declared king. Heerevpon, Alphonso was en­forced to craue assistance of Iacob Aben Ioseph king of Maroco, who before had bene an enemie to Alphōso: but vpon detestatiō of this vnnatural rebelliō, he sent forces to him, protesting notwithstāding that so soone as the war should be ended, he wold become his ene­mie againe. So Alphonso by help, partly of the Marocco Moores, & partly of his subiects which remained loy­all, maintained against his sonne both his title & state during his lyfe, but not without extremitie of bloud­shed; & opportunitie for the Moores, being assistāt to both parties, to make themselues more strong with­in the countries of Spaine. For this cause Alphonso dis­inherited his sonne by his testament, and cast a cruell cursse vpon him & his posteritie: & afterward it vvas ordeined in an assembly of the states holden at Tero, that the childrē of the elder brother deceased, should [Page] be preferred before their vnckle.

How then will you verifie your two points by this historie? First, that Alphonso vvas depriued by a pub­lick act of parlament: secondly, that it turned to the great cōmoditie of the state. It is not a milliō of Mas­ses that are sufficiēt to satisfie for all your deceitful & malicious vntruthes. I meruaile how the rebellion of Absolon, against king Dauid his father escaped you: Oh; it wanted successe; & you could not so easily disguise the report.

You write that the common wealth of Spaine, resol­uing to depose D. Pedro the cruell, sent for his brother Henry out of france, & required him to bring a strength of frenchmen with him: but hereby you make it plain, that the common wealth was not fully agreed. The truth is, that this was a dangerous deuisiō of the state, between two concurrents; some holding for Henry, & some for Pedro. Henry obtained forren asistance by the french, Pedro by the english. In the meane time, whilst Peter was throwen out of state by the forces of france, & after that Henry by the armes of england; & againe Peter deiected both from dignitie and life by his bro­ther Henry; the poore country became a spectacle for one of your enterludes.

Your example of Don Sancho Capello king of Portugal, containeth many intollerable vntruthes. For neither was he depriued of his dignitie, neither did the Pope & counsell of Lions giue either authoritie or consent that he should be depriued; neither was he driuen out of his realme into Castilla; neither died he in banishmēt; neither was Alphonso his brother king during his life. These fiue vntruths you huddle into one heape. The counsaile of Lions wholy opposed against the depo­sing [Page] of Don Sancho, notwithstanding many disabilities were obiected against him: in regard wherof they gaue directiō, that Alphonso his brother should be regent of the realme; as in that case it is both vsuall & fit. But San­cho taking this to dislike, did seeke aide of the king of Castile; & in that pursuite ended his life without issue: wherby the right of succession deuolued to Alphonso.

To your examples of greeke Emperours, I will an­swer by your words; which are; cap. 5 pa. 8 [...] that for the most part they came not orderly to the crowne, but many times the meanes thereof were tribulent and seditious.

The deposing of Henry king of Polonia, I acknow­ledge to be both true & iust; I haue nothing to except against it. When the crowne of France did discend vn­to him, he forsooke Polonia, & refused to return again to that swaggering gouernment, wherevpon they did depose him. Giue vs the like case, & you shal be allow­ed the like proceeding; but you esteeme your exam­ples by tale & not by touch: being not much vnlike a certaine mad fellow in Athens, who imagined eue­ry ship which was brought into the hauen to be his: for vvhatsoeuer you finde of a king deposed, you lay claime vnto it, as both lawfully done, and pertay­ning to your purpose, whereas one of these doth al­waies faile.

Concerning your two examples, one of Sueden, and the other of Denmarke, I shall haue occasion to speake hereaf [...]er. The nobility of those countries pretēd, that their kings are not soueraigne, but that the power in highest matters of state pertaineth vnto them. If it bee thus, the examples are not appliable to the question, if it be otherwise, then the princes had wrong.

[Page]Wee are come now to our domesticall examples; the first whereof is that of king Iohn, who was de­posed by the Pope, you say, at the suite of his owne people. All this people was the Archbishop of Cant. the bish. of London, and the bish. of Ely; at whose cōplaint, the Pope did write to Phillip king of France, that hee should expell king Iohn out of his realme. If not conscience, if not ordinarie honestie, pure shame should haue drawen you to another forme of writing. Hee was also depriued (you say) afterwards by his Barons. Heauy beast; call you this a depriuation? The commons were neuer called to consent; the Cler­gie were so opposite to those that stoode in armes a­gainst king Iohn, that they procured excommunication against them: first generally; then by name; lastly, Lewes the French kings sonne was also included: of the Nobilitie, which is onely the third state of the realme, I make no doubt but some reserued themselues to bee guided by successe; others, and namely the Earles of Warren, Arundell, Chester, Penbrooke, Ferrers, Salis­burie, and diuers Barons did openly adhere vnto king Iohn; you may as well call any other rebellion a depriuation, as affirme that the rest either did or might depriue him. And whereas you bring in king Henry the third, as a most worthie succes­sour after this depriuation; I will derogate nothing from his worthinesse: but there was neuer king in England, who without concurrent in the title of the crowne, did draw more bloud out of the sides of his subiects.

Your second example is of king Edward the se­cond, [Page] whom many of our histories report to bee of a good and courteous nature and not vnlearned; im­puting his defectes rather to Fortune, then either to counsell or carriage of his affaires. His deposition was a violent furie, led by a vvife, both cruell & vnchast; & can with no better countenance of right be iustified, then may his lamentable both indignities and death, vvhich therupon did ensue. And although the nobi­litie, by submitting thēselues to the gouerment of his sonne, did breake those occasions of wars which doe vsually rise vpon such disorders, yet did not the hand of God forget to pursue reuenge. For albeit king Ed­ward his son enioyed both a long & prosperous raign, yet his next successor king Richard the second, vvas in the like violent manner imprisoned depriued & put to death. I will prosecute the successiue reuenge which heereof also ensued, being a strange matter, & worthie to be rung into the eares of all ages. King Henry the fourth, by whom king Richard was deposed, did exer­cise the chiefest acts of his raigne, in executing those who conspired with him against king Richard. His son had his vertue well seconded by felicity; during whose raigne by meanes of the wars in France, the humour against him was otherwise imployed & spent: but his next successor king Henry the sixth was in the very like manner depriued, & together with his yong son Ed­ward imprisoned and put to death by king Edward the fourth. This Edward died not without suspiciō of poi­son; & after his death, his two sons were in like maner disinherited, imprisoned & murthered by their cruell vnkle, the duke of Glocester: who being both a tyrant and vsurper, was iustly encountred and slaine, by king [Page] Henry the seauenth, in the field. So infallible is the law of iustice in reuenging cruelties and wrongs, not al­waies obseruing the presence of times wherein they are done, but often calling them into reckoning; whē the offenders retaine least memorie of them.

Likewise the deposition of king Richard the second was a tempestuous rage, neither led nor restrained by any rules of reason or of state; not sodainely rai­sed and at once, but by very cunning and artificiall degrees. But examine his actions vvithout distem­pred iudgement, & you will not condemne him to be exceeding either insufficient or euill weigh the impu­tations that were obiected against him, and you shall find nothing either of any truth or of great moment.

Hollingshead writeth in Richard, 2., that he was most vnthankfully vsed by his subiects; for although, through the frailtie of his youth, he demeaned himselfe more dissolutely, then was agreeable to the royaltie of his estate, yet in no kings daies, the commons were in greater wealth, the Nobilitie more honoured, and the Clergie lesse wronged: vvho notwithstanding in the euill guided strength of their will tooke head against him, to their owne headlong destruction afterward: partly during the raign of king Henry, his next successor, whose grea­test atchiuements were against his owne people; but more especially in succeeding times, whē vpon occa­siō of this disorder, more english bloud was spent, thē was in all the forren wars which had ben since the cō ­quest. Three causes are commonly insinuated by you, for which a king may be deposed; tyranny, insufficien­cie, & impietie: but what prince could hold his state, what people their quiet assured, if this your doctrine [Page] should take place? how many good princes doth en­uie brand with one of these markes? what action of state can be so ordred, that either blind ignorance or set mallice wil not easely straine to one of these heads? euery execution of iustice, euery demand of tribute or supply shall be claimed tyrannie: euery infortunate euent shall be exclaimed insufficiencie: euery kind of religion shall by them of another sect, be proclaimed impietie. So dangerous it is to permit this high power to a heedlesse and headlesse multitude, who measure things, not by reason and iustice, but either by opi­nion, which commonly is partiall; or else by report, which vsually is full of vncertainties and errors: the most part doing because others doe; all easie to be­come slauish to any mans ambitious attempt. So dan­gerous it is to open our eares to euery foolish Phaetō, who vndertaking to guid the chariot of the Sun will soone cast the whole earth into combustion.

You proceede that king Henry the sixth was also deposed for defectes in gouernment. Let vs yeeld a little to you, that you may bee deceiued; a little that you may be carried by your affections; how can you excuse these open vntruthes, wherein it cannot bee but the diuell hath a finger? you cannot bee ig­norant, that the onely cause which drevv the familie of Yorke into armes against king Henry, vvas the title which they had vnto the crowne: by vertue whereof, it vvas first enacted, that Richard duke of Yorke should succeed king Henry, after his death: but for that hee made vnseasonable attempts, he was declared by par­lament incapable of succession, and afterwards slaine at the battaile of wakefield.

[Page]Then Edward his sonne, prosecuting the enterprise, & hauing vanquished king Henry at the battaile of S. Al­bons, obtained possession of the state, caused king Hen­rye to be deposed, and himselfe to be proclaimed & crowned king. Afterward he vvas chased out of the realme, and by act of parlament both depriued and disabled from the crowne. Lastly he returned againe, and depriued king Henrye both from gouernment & from life. It is true, that some defects vvere obiected against king Henry; but this was to estrāge the harts of the peple frō him. The main cause of the war did pro­ceed, frō the right of the one partie, & possessiō of the other: The contrarietie of the acts of parlament vvas caused, by the alternatiue victories of them both.

Your last example is of king Richard the third, of vvhom you vvright; First, that although he sinned in murthering his Nephewes, yet after their death hee vvas lawfull king: Secondly, that he was deposed by the common wealth, who called out of France Henry earle of Richmond, to put him downe, Philosophers say that dreames doe commonly arise, by a reflection of the phantasie vpon some subiect, wherof we haue meditated the daie before. It may be y ^• your drowsie conceit vvas here cast into a dreame, of that vvheron it had dozed in all this chapter: Or at the best, that you are like vnto those, vvho haue so often tould a lie, that they perswade themselues it is true. King Edward the fourth left other children besides those that were murthered; the duke of Clarence also, vvho vvas elder brother to king Richard, lest issue in life; all vvhich had precedence of right before him. And as for the se­cond point, tell mee I pray you, by vvhat parlament [Page] vvas king Richard deposed? vvher did the states assem­ble? vvhen did they send for the earle of Richmond to put him down? by what decree? by vvhat messengers? Ther is no answer to be made, but one; and that is, to confesse ingenuously, that you say vntrue; & that it is your vsuall manner of deceiuing, to impute the act of a few vnto all; & to make euerie euent of armes, to be a iudicial proceeding of the common wealth. For it is manifest, that the earle of Richmond had his first strēgth from the king of France; & that after his discent into England, more by halfe, both of the nobilitie & com­mon people did stand for king Richard, then stirre a­gainst him. You adioyne for a speciall consideration, that most excellent princes succeeded these vvhom you affirme to be deposed. I vvill nor extenuate the excellencie of any Prince; but I hould it more vvor­thie to be considered, that these disorders spent Eng­land a sea of bloud.

In the ende you conclude, that all these depri­uations of Princes vvere lawfull. Nay; by your fauour; if you sweat out your braines, you shall ne­uer euince, that a fact is lawfull beecause it is done. Yes (you say) for othervvise two great inconue­niences vvould follow; one, that the actes of those that vvere put in their place, should be voide and vniust: the other, that none vvho now pretend to these Crownes, could haue any tytle, [...]or that they descend from them, vvho succeeded those that were depriued.

You deserue now to be basted with words vvell sti­ped in vineger and salt: but I will be more charitable vnto you, and leaue bad speaches to black mouthes. [Page] For the first, the possession of the crowne purgeth all defects, and maketh good the actes of him that is in authoritie, although he vvanteth both capacitie and right. And this doth Vlpian expressely determine In [...] Barbari­us. D. de offic. praesid. vpon respect (as he saith) to the common good. For the other point, the successors of an vsurper, by course and compasse of time, may prescribe a right; if they vvho haue receiued wrong, discontinue both pursuit and claime. P [...]normitane saith: In [...]. cu [...]a pastoralis de [...]u­ [...]epation. Successor in dignitate potest praescribere, non abstante vitio sui praedecessor is: A successor in dignitie may prescribe, notwithstāding the fault of his predecessor: otherwise, causes of vvar should be immortall, and titles perpetually remaine vncertaine.

Now then for summarie collection of all that you haue saide▪ your protestations are good; your proofes light and loose; your conclusions both dangerous & false. The first doth sauour of God; the second of man; the third of the diuell.

HEere you cloase with Billaye vpon two points; first, vvhether a king is subiect to any law; Secondly, whether all tem­poralities are in proprietie the Kings: but because these questions doe little perteine to our principall controuersie, I vvill not make any stay vpon them; it suffiseth that vve may say vvith Seneca De benefic. lib. 7. c [...].5. Omnia rex imperio possidet, singuli do­mino: The king hath empire, euery man his particular pro­prietie in all things.

After this, you proceede further to make good, that the Princes before mencioned vvere lawfully deposed; and that by all law; both diuine and hu­mane, naturall, nationall and positiue. Your cause is so badd, that you haue need to set a bould coun­tenance vpon it. But what deuine lawes doe you alleage? You haue largely beefore declared (you saye) that GOD doth approoue the forme of go­uernmēt vvhich euery common wealth doth choose, [Page] as also the conditions and statutes which it doth ap­point vnto her prince. I must now take you for a natu­rall lyer, when you wil not forbeare to bely your selfe: you neuer proued any such matter; & the contrary is euident, that sometimes entire gouernments; often, customes & statutes of state; & very commonly acci­dentall actiōs, are so vnnaturall & vniust, that (other­wise then for a punishment and curse) wee cannot say that God doth approue thē. We haue often heard that the Church cannot erre in matters of Faith; but that in matter of gouerment a cōmon wealth cannot erre, it was neuer (I assure my selfe) published before.

But let vs suppose (supposall is free) that God alloweth that forme of gouernment which euery common wealth doth choose: doth it therfore follow that by all deuine lawes princes may be deposed by their subiects? these broken peeces will neuer bee squared to forme strong argument. But wherefore doe not you produce the deuine canons of scripture? surely, they abhorre to speake one word in your be­halfe: yea, they doe giue expresse sentence against you, as I haue shewed before.

Well let this passe among your least escapes, in making God either the author or aider of rebelliō: you alledge no other humane law, but that princes are subiect vnto law and order. I vvill not denie but ther is a duty for princes to performe: but how proue you that their subiects haue power to depose them if they faile? In this manner. As the common vvealth gaue them their authoritie for the common good, so it may also take the same away, if they abbuse it. But I haue manifested before Cap. 1., both that the peo­ple [Page] may so graunt away their authoritie that they can­not resume [...]t; & also that few princes in y ^• world hold their state by graunt of the people. I will neuer heere­after esteeme a mans valure by his voice: Your braue boast of all lawes, diuine, humane, naturall, nationall and positiue, is disolued into smoake: you busie your selfe as the Poets wright of Morpheus, in presenting shadowes to men a sleepe.

But the chiefest reason (you say) the very ground and foundation of all. Soft: what reason? what ground? if you haue alreadie made proofe by all lawes, humane and deuine, naturall, nationall and positiue, what better reason? what surer ground will you bring? Tush: these interruptions. The chiefest reason (you say) the very ground and foundation of all is, that the common wealth is superiour to the prince; and that the authoritie which the prince hath, is not absolute, but by the way of mandate and com­mission from the common wealth.

This is that which I expected all this time: you haue hetherto approached by stealing steps, you are now come cloase to the wall, do but mount into credit and the fort is your owne. You affirmed at the first, that princes might be deposed for disabilitie; then, for mis­gouernmen [...]; now, vpon pleasure and at will. For they who haue giuen authoritie by cōmission, doe alwaies retaine more then they graunt; c. dudum. de praeb. lib 6. & are not excluded either frō commanding or iudging, by way of preuen­tion, concurrence, or evocation; euen in those cases which they haue giuen in charge l. iudicium soluitur. D. de iudic.: The reason is de­clared by Vlpian l. solet. de iurisd.. because hee to whom iurisdiction is com­mitted representeth his person who gaue commission, and not [Page] his owne. Herevpon Alexander in l. vlt. de iurisd., Panormitane in c. pastora­l [...]s de off. ord., Innocen­tius, and Felinus in c. cum ec­clesiarum. co. doe affirme, that they may cast their commissioners out of power when they please, be­cause as Paulus saith in d. l. iudi­cium.; a man can iudge no longer, when he forbiddeth who gaue authoritie.

Further, all states take denomination from that part wherin the supreme power is setled; as if it bee in one prince, it is called a monarchie; if in many of highest ranck, then it is an aristocracie; if in the people, then a democracie. Whervpon it followeth; if the people are superiour to the prince, if the prince hath no power but by commission from them, that then all estates are populare: for we are not so much to respect who doth execute this high power of state, as from whō imme­diately it is deriued. Hereto let vs ad that which you haue said in another place cap [...]2.; that in populare gouern­ments there is nothing but sedition, trouble, tumults, outragies & iniustices vpon euery light occasiō; & thē we shall perceiue; first, that you want the art of a wise deceiuer, not to be entangled in your tale; secondly, that this is meere poison, which the diuell hath dropt out of your pen, to infect christian coūtries with diso­bedience & disorder. In a word, to the contrary of this your impudent vntruth, our laws do acknowledge su­preme authority in the prince within the realme & do­minions of england 1. El. 1., neither can subiects beare thē ­selues either superior or equall to their soueraigne; or attempt violence either against his persō or estate, but as well the ciuill law l. j. d. ad. l. Iul. maiest., as the particulare lawes & cu­stomes of all countries do adiudge it high & hainous treasō. I will speake now without passion; what reason haue we, to accept your idle talk for a kind of authori­ty, [Page] against the iudgement & lawes of most nations in the world?

You proceede that the power of a prince is giuen to him by the common wealth, with such conditions & exceptions, as if the same be not kept, the people stand free. That the prince receiueth his power vnder plain conditiōs, you go about to proue afterward: now you hold on, that in all mutual contracts, if one side recede from promise, the other remaineth not obliged▪ & this you proue by two rules of the law. The first is Frustra sidem sibi quis po­stulat seruari ab eo, cui sidē a se praestitam seruare recu­sat.; he doth in vaine require promise to be kept of another man, to whom he refuseth to performe that which he promised: the other is non obstrin­gitur quis ad implendum quod iurauit si ab alia parte non inpletur, cuius respectu praebuit iura­mentum. a man is not bound to performe his oath, if on the other part, that be not performed, in respect whereof he did sweare.

Poore fellow, had you ben as conuersant in the light of law, and cleere course of iustice, as you are in the smoake & dust of some corner of a colledge, you wold neuer haue concluded so generally so confidētly vpō any of the rules of law, which are subiect, for the most part, vnto many exceptions. Alexander in l. cum proponas. c. de pact. & Felinus in c. peruenit 2 de iureiur. doe assigne fiue fallencies vnto these rules: Socinus in tract fallen reg 199. giueth the cootrarie rule: to him that breaketh his faith or oath, faith ought to bee kept; & thē restraineth it with seauē limitations. But all affirme, that in those offices which are mutuall between any persōs, by the law of nature or of God; as between the father & the child, the hus­band & the wife, the master & the seruant, the prince and the subiect; although the same be further assured by promise or by oath, the breach of duty in the one, is no discharge vnto the other.

And therfore if the father performeth not his duty towards his children, they are not thereby acquitted [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] both of the obedience & care, which God & nature exacteth of them; howsoeuer Solon in his lawes dis­charged children from nourishing their parents, if they did not traine them in some trade, wherby they might acquire their liuing. Much lesse are subiects exempted from obedience, if the prince either erre or be defectiue in gouernment: because the like res­pect is not due vnto parents as vnto Princes (as I haue somewhat touched before) insomuch as a sonne that beareth authoritie, hath right both to commaūd and compell the father. l. ille a quo & [...]. seq. ad Treb.

This was declared among the Romanes, by that which Plutarch in apopht., Liuie lib. 24., Valerius lib. 2. ca. 1., and Gellius lib. 2 ca. 2., doe report of Q. Fabius: to whome, being consull, when Fabius Maximus his father, who had bene consull the yeare before, did approch sitting vpon his horse, the sonne commanded him by a sergeant to allight: the father not onely obeyed, but highly commended both the courage and iudgement of his sonne, in maintaining the maiestie which he did beare, and in preferring a publicke both dutie and authoritie bee­fore priuate. Vpon those examples Paulus the lawier did wright, l. postlimi­nium. filius D. da capit, et postlim. that publick discipline was in higher estimation among the Romane parents, then the loue of children.

After an impertinēt discourse, that vpon diuers cō ­siderations an oath ought not to be performed; you annex another cause wherefore subiects may with­draw their alleageāce; & that is, when it should turne to the notable dammage of the common wealth and both these you affirme to be touched, in the depriua­tion of Childeric king of France. But I regard not what [Page] was touched in the depriuation of Childeric; I haue answered to that in the chapter next before; I require either arguments or authoritie of more tough tem­per. Well then let vs turne back the leafe, and there we shall finde a rule of the law (because by rules one­ly you will beat down rule) c. In mali [...]. d [...] reg. iur. in 6. In euill promises it is not expedient to keepe faith: Which is also confirmed by a sentence of Isidorus: 22. q. 4.4. c. 5 In euill promises, break your word; in a dishonest oath change your purpose.

Well fare your vvits, good soule; doe you accompt the promise of obedience euill? not so (I suppose you will say) but it turneth to be euill vvhen it tur­neth to the notable detrimēt of the commō wealth. It is one of your peculiar guifts, the further you goe, the more impious you declare your selfe. For if you take the word euill in noe higher sence then for de­triment and damage, it would follow vpon your rule, that a man vvere no further tyed to his promise, then the performance thereof were aduantageable vnto him. You vvould inforce also, that if the father doth dissipate his patrimoniall estate, and runne a course to ruine his familie, the children and the wife may thervpon disauow their duties.

But if vvee take a true touch of this point, we shall finde, that the vices of any Prince are not suf­ficient of themselues to ouerthrow a state, except therevpon rebellions be raised, vvhich vvill draw all things into confusion. For there is no Prince, vvhich either hath liued, or can almost be imagined to liue, in so little sence of humanitie, but general­ly he both fauoureth and maintaineth some order of iustice; onely against particuler persons, some of [Page] them haue violently bene carried by the tempest of their passion, vvhereby notwithstanding the inordi­nate desires of one man, can not possibly reach to the ruine of all.

So saith Suetonius, In domit. that vnder Domitian the pro­uinces vvere vvell gouerned, onely certaine priuate men at Rome, felt the euill of his crueltie and other vices. But vvhen the people doe breake into tumult, then all course of iustice is stopped; then is either assistance made, or resistance vveakned for forren in­uasion; then is euery one raysed into hope vvho can­not flye but vvith other mennes feathers; then, as vvhen a fierce horse hath cast his rider, the reines are loosed to those insolencies, vvhich a dissolute peo­ple, nothing restrained either by honestie or feare doe vsually commit. For as it is the nature of men, vvhen they come out of one extremitie vvherin they haue bene houlden by force, to runne vvith a swift course into another, vvithout staying in the mid­dest; so the people breaking out of tyrannie, if they bee not helde back, vvill runne headlong into vnbrideled libertie; and the harder they vvere kept vnder beefore, the more insolently vvill they then insult.

I obserue that Saint Paul alleageth two reasons vvherefore vve should be obedient euen to vvicked and cruell Princes: one is for conscience sake, Bee­cause they are the ministers of God Rom. 13., and in their roy­altie doe beare his Image: Another, for the safetie, and tranquillitie of our selues; that wee may lead vn­der them a quiet and peaceable lyfe 1. Tim. 2.2.. Wherevpon the prophet Ieremiah Ierem. 29.7 also exhorted the Iewes, to [...]eeke [Page] the peace of the cittie vvhether they should be trans­ported, because in the peace therof their quiet should consist: For by obedience, a few particulars remaine in daunger; by rebellion, all; by obedience, vve can be vnder the tyrannie but of one; by rebellion, vve are exposed to the rapine and crueltie of many; by the one nothing, by the other all things are permit­ted. Vpon this ground Saint Augustine saide; Generale quippe pactum est humanae succietatis, re­gibus obedi [...]e. confess. lib. 2. It is a generall couenant of humane societie to obey Kings; And likewise Saint Ambrose Magnum est et speciale do­cumentū &c. ad Auxentium It is a great and speciall point of doctrine whereby Christians are taught to be subiect vn­to higher powers.

Three vvaies a cruell Prince may vvork violence against his subiects; vpon their goods; vpon their persons; and vpon their consciences, by commaun­ding them to commit that which is euil. Of the first, Saint Ambrose saith: Ad Auxentiū If the Emperour demaundeth tri­bute, wee doe not deny him; If he desireth fieldes, let him take them if he please: I doe not giue them to the Empe­rour; but therewith also I doe not deny them. Of the se­cond, Tertullian vvrighteth Apol. as I haue alleaged him before: For vvhat vvar are vvee vnseruiceable or vn­fit, although vnequall in number, vvho doe so vvil­lingly suffer death: yea, he vvas so farre from iudge­ing it lawfull to resist, that he thought it scarce al­lowable to flye. In the third case, not your rule of law, but the rule of the Apostles taketh place, It is better to obey GOD then man: Act. 4. vvhereby the subiect is not bound to yeeld obedience.

But how? hee is not bound to obey by doeing, but by suffering hee is: he is not bound to obey in doing that onely vvhich is euill; but he is not [Page] thereby freed from doing any other thing which is lawfully commanded. S. Augustine saith in Psalm.: Iulian was an infidell Emperour, an Apostata; an Idolater; christian soldi­ers did serue this infidell Emperour; when hee would haue them worship Idols, and offer Frankencense vnto them, th [...]y preferred God before him: but when hee saide; bring foorth the armie, march against such a nation; they did pre­sently obey. All this seemeth to bee confirmed by God himselfe, who after hee had forevvarned the peo­ple of Israell by the mouth of Samuell, 1. Sam. S.what heauie, what open iniustice they should endure vnder some of their kings, hee concludeth in these words: and yee shall cry out in that day because of your king, and the Lord will not heare you. As if hee had said: you shall grudge at this burthen, you shall grone vnder it; but you shall not haue power, either to shrinke from it, or to shake it off.

Surely, if you had been aduised, you would priuily haue blowen your blasphemies into the eares of those ideots, who adore you for the great penitentiaries of the sea of Rome, & esteeme your idle imaginations as the articles of their faith: & not so publikely haue pou­red forth your self into these paradoxes, both impious & absurd; not so boisterously haue stepped, like Hercu­les Furens, vpon the opē stage of the world, to denoūce depriuation against all princes. You would not thus confidently haue opposed your hot headed assertiō a­gainst al the ancient fathers of the church. You would not thus ignorantly haue troubled the waters of true humane wisdom, by corrupting the sence of the ciuell laws: you would not thus profanely haue abused the scriptures in maintaining rebellion, as coniurers doe [Page] in inuocating the diuell. For first, you are thereby dis­couered to be, neither religious, modest, nor wise: se­condly, you haue runne your selfe into the compasse of a Canon, in the councell of Chalcedon. C. coniura­tionū xj q j. Where­in it is thus decreed against you: If Clerkes shall be found to be contriuers of conspiracies, or raisers of factions, let them be degraded.

After this you declare, who is a tyrant; and that is a king, (you say) if once he doth decline from his du­tie: which is a large description, and fit to set all chri­stian countries on floate with bloud. Comines saith, that he is to be esteemed a good king, whose vertues are not ouerballanced by vice.

I omit your thicke error in putting no difference betweene a magistrate and a king, with many other of like qualitie, and do come now to a principall point of your strength: that Christian princes at this day are admitted vpon conditions, and likewise with prote­stations, that if they do not performe the same, their subiects are free from all alleageance. This you will prooue by the particular oathes of all Princes, if the ouerrunning of your tongue may haue the ful course without encounter.

FIrst I will preface; that no Prince is so­ueraigne, who acknowledgeth him­selfe either subiect or accomptable to any but to God; euen as Marcus Aure­lius said: That Magistrates were iud­ges of priuate men, and the Prince of Magistrates, and God of the Prince. In regard of this immediate subiection, Princes are most especially obliged to the lawes of God and of Nature: for In l. 2. D. de seruit. & aqua Baldus, cons. 216. Alexander, De legib. Speculator, In l. vlt. c. si contra ins. all interpreters, c. sunt qui­dam. 25. q. 1. the lawe it selfe, do af­firme, that Princes are more strictly bound to these lawes, nunc. then any of their subiectes. Whereof Plutarch. in Problem. Graec. Diony­sius the Tyrant had some sence, when he sayd vnto his mother: That he was able to dispence with the lawes of Syracusa, but against the lawes of Nature he had no power. If therefore a Prince doth professe, that he will beare himselfe regardfull o [...] the accom­plishment of these lawes, he doth not condition or restraine himselfe, but maketh an honorable promise of indeuour, to discharge his dutie; being tyed there­by to no s [...]anter scope then he was before. The rea­son hereof is: L. iij. D. de leg. j. Dec. in reg. 77. n. 10. Quia expressio eius quod tacitè inest, nihil operatur: The expressing of that which is secretly vnder­stood, [Page] worketh nothing.

Againe, when the promise is not annexed to the authoritie, but voluntarily and freely made by the Prince, his estate is not thereby made conditionall. For the interpreters of the Ciuill lawe do consent in this rule: In l. iuris­gentium. Pacta conuenta quae contractibus non insunt, non formant actionem: Couenants which are not inhe­rent in contracts, do not forme an action. quinimo. And therefore although by all lawes, both of conscience and state, a Prince is bound to performe his promise; because (as the Maister of sentences saith) God himself will stand obliged to his word: yet is not the authoritie, but the person of the Prince hereby affected; the person is both tyed and touched in honour, the authoritie ceasseth not, if performances do faile.

Of this sort was that which you report of Traian, who in deliuering the sword to his gouernors, would say: If I raigne iustly, then vse it for me; if otherwise, then vse it against me: but where you adde, that these are the very same words in effect, which Princes do vse at their coronations, (pardon me, for it is fit I should be mooued) you will find it to bee a very base [...] lye. Of this nature was that also which the same Tra­ian did, (to encourage his subiects to do the like) in taking an oath to obserue the lawes: which Pliny the younger did account so strange, as the like before had not bene seene. But afterward, Theodoric did follow that fact; whereupon Cassiodorus saith: Ecce, Traiani nostri clarum seculis reparamus exemplum; iurat vobis per quem iuratis: We repaire the famous example of Tra­ian; he sweareth to you by whome you sweare. So when king Henry the fifth was accepted for successour [Page] to the crowne of Fraunce, he made promise, to main­taine the Parliament in the liberties thereof. And like­wise diuers Princes do giue their faith, to mainetaine the priuiledges of the Church, and not to change the lawes of the Realme: which oath is interpreted by In l. claris l. de fideis. Baldus, In c. pro [...]l­lor [...]i de prae­bend. Panormitane, and Cons. 220. lib. 6. & cons. 122. & 125. lib. 4. Alexander, to extend no further then when the lawes shall be both profita­ble and iust: because Iustice and the common benefit of subiects, is the principal point, both of the oath and dutie of a Prince, whereto all other clauses must be referred. And now to your examples.

First, because in all the ranke of the Hebrew kings, you cannot find either condition or oath; not: in the auncient Empires and kingdomes of the world; not vsually in the [...]lourishing time of the Romaine state, both vnder heathen and christian Emperors; because these times are too pure for your purpose, you fumble foorth a dull coniecture: That forsomuch as the first kings were elected by the people, it is like that they did it vpon conditions and assurances for themselues. That the first kings receiued not their authoritie from the people, I haue manifested before In cap. 1.: and yet your inference hereupon is no other, then if you should sue in some Court for a legacie, alleadging nothing for your intent, but that it is like the Testator shold leaue you something; in which case it is like (I suppose) that your plea wold be answered with a silent scorne.

After a few loose speeches, which no man would stoupe to gather together, you bring in the example of Anastasius the first Emperour of Constantinople; of whom the Patriarch Euphemius required before his coronation, a confessiō of the faith in writing, wherin [Page] he should promise to innouate nothing. And further, he promised to take away certaine oppressions, and to giue offices without mony. Let vs take things as they are, and not speake vpon idle imagination, but agreea­ble to sence: what either condition or restraint do you find in these words? Condition they do not forme, because in case of failance they do not make the autho­ritie void: neither do they make restraint, because they containe no point, whereunto the lawe of God did not restraine him. All this he was bound to performe without an oath; and if he were a thousand times sworne, he was no more but bound to perform it: euē as if a father should giue his word to cloath and feede his child; or the husband to loue his wife; or any man to discharge that dutie, which God and Nature doth require. It is true, that Anastasius was both a wicked man, and iustly punished by God for the breach of his faith; but his subiects did neuer challenge to be free therefore from their alleageance.

The same aunswere may be giuen to the promise, which Michael the first gaue to Nicephorus the Pa­triarch: That he would not violate the Ordinances of the Church, nor embrue his hands with innocent bloud; espe­cially if you take the word Ordinances for matters ne­cessarie to be beleeued: but if you take it in a larger sence, then haue I also declared in the beginning of this chapter, how farre the promise doth extend.

Your next example is of the Empire of Almaine; from whence all that you obiect, doth fall within this circle. After the death of Charles the Great, the empire was held by right of succession, vntill his line was de­termined in Conrade the first. After whose death it be­came [Page] came electiue: first in Henry duke of Saxony, then in Otho his son; and afterwards in the rest: from whom notwithstanding no other promise was wrested, but the discharge of that dutie, which they were enfor­med, or rather threatned, that God wold seuerely ex­act at their hands. But (as in all electiue States it vsu­ally hapneth) at euery new change and choise, the Emperor was deplumed of some of his feathers, vntill in the end he was made naked of authoritie, the Princes hauing drawne all power to themselues.

So by degrees the Empire was changed from a Monarchie to a pure aristocracie; the Emperour bea­ring the title thereof, but the maiestie and puissance remaining in the States. During which weaknesse of the Emperour, some points were added to his oath, which seemed to derogate from the soueraigntie of his estate. But what is this to those Princes, who haue retained their dignitie, without any diminution, ei­ther of authoritie, or of honour.

The like may be said of Polonia, which not many hundred yeares since was erected into a kingdome: and although the States did challenge therein a right of election, yet did it alwaies passe according to pro­pinquitie of bloud, and was esteemed a soueraigne Monarchie; vntill after the death of Casimire the Great, when Lodonicus his Nephew King of Hun­garie, rather greedie then desirous to be king also of Polonia, did much abase the Maiestie thereof. Yet falling a [...]terward into the line of Iagello, who maried one of the daughters of Lodowicke, it recouered the auncient both dignitie and strength. But when that line also failed in Sigismond Augustus, the last male [Page] of that Familie, the States elected Henry Duke of Anjowe for their King, with this clause irritant; That if hee did violate any point of his oath, the people should owe him no alleageance. But whereas you report this as the vsuall oath of the Kinges of Po­lonia, you deserue to heare the plainest tearme of vntruth.

In the kingdome of Spaine you distinguish two times: one, before the conquest thereof by the Moores; the other, after it was recouered againe by the Christians. I acknowledge a difference in these two times; for that in the one, the right of the king­dome was electiue; in the other, it hath alwaies remai­ned successiue: insomuch as In spec. tit. 14. Peter Belluga, a diligent writer of the rights of Arragon, doth affirme, that the people haue no power in election of the king, Veniamus n. 10. except in case the line should faile.

Concerning the matter in controuersie, you af­firme, that the kings did sweare the same points in ef­fect, which before haue bene mentioned. This wee must take vpon your forfeited faith, for you alleadge no forme of oath; onely you write, that the fourth nationall Councell of An. 633. cap. 74. Toledo, with all humilitie conuenient did require, that the present king, and all other that should follow, would be meeke and mo­derate towardes their subiects, and gouerne them with iustice, and not giue sentence in causes capitall without assistance: declaring further, that if any of them should exercise cruell and proude authoritie, [...] they were condemned by Christ, with the sen­tence of Excommunication, and separated to euerla­sting iudgement.

[Page]But what pang hath possessed your dreaming braines, to tearme this by a marginall note, Conditi­ons of raigning in Spaine? being no other then a reue­rent and graue admonition of the dutie of a king, with a feareful declaration of the iudgment of God against wicked Princes. And that which was afterward de­creed in the sixt Councell of Toledo: That the king should sweare, not to suffer any man to breake the Catholike faith, because it is a principall point of his dutie, his estate was not thereby made conditio­nall.

The rest of this passage you fill vppe with froath of the antiquated lawe of Don Pelayo, prescribing a forme of inaugurating the Kinges of Spaine; whereof there is not one point, either now in vse, or pertaining to the purpose. So miserable is your case, that you can write nothing therein, but that which is either impertinent or vntrue.

For Fraunce, your first example is taken from the coronation of Philip the first: wherein you note, that king Henrie his father requested the peo­ple to sweare obedience to his sonne; inferring there­by, that a coronation requireth a new consent, which includeth a certaine election of the subiects. But this is so light, that the least breath is sufficient to dis­perse it. Philip was crowned king during the life of his father: which action, as it was not ordinarie, so was it of such both difficultie and weight, that it could not be effected without assemblie and con­sent of the States. The oath which he made, is in this forme extant in the Librarie of Rheimes: I do promise before God and his Saints, that I will conserue to euery one [Page] committed vnto me canonicall priuiledge, & due Law & Iustice, and wil defend thē, by the helpe of God, so much as shall lye in my power, as a king by right ought to do within his Realme, to euery Bishop, and to the Church cōmitted to him: and further, to the people cōmitted to my charge, I wil grant by my authority the dispensatiō of laws according to right. Ad to this a more anciēt form of the oth of those kings, which it seemeth you haue not seene: I sweare in the name of God Almighty, & promise, to gouerne well & duly the subiects cōmitted to my charge, & to do with all my power, iudgement, iustice and mercy. Ad also the oath which you alleage of Philip the 2. surnamed Augustus: To maintaine all canonicall priuileges, law & Iustice due to euery mā, to the vttermost of his power; to defēd his sub­iects as a good king is bound to do; to procure that they be kept in the vniō of the Church; to defend thē frō al excesse, rapine, extortion & iniquity; to take order that Iustice be kept with equity & mercy; & to endeuor to expell heretiks. What doth all this rise vnto, but a princely promise to discharge honorably and truly those points of duty, which the laws of God did lay vpō thē? What other cōditions or restraints are imposed? what other cōtract is hereby made? where are the protestations which in the end of the last chap. you promised to shew, that if the Prince do faile in his promise, the subiects are free frō their allegeāce? what clause do you find sounding to that sense? But you litle regard any thing that you say; you easily remēber to forget your word. Wel thē, we must put these your vaine speeches into the reck­ning of mony accōpted, but not receiued: and seeing you cannot shew vs, that the kings of France and of Spaine are tied to any condition, whereto the law of God doth not bind thē, I will not vary frō the iudge­mēt of Ordradus Cons. 69.in affirming thē to be absolute kings.

[Page]I haue pressed this point the rather in this place, because you write, that most neighbour nations haue takē the forme of annointing & crowning their kings, from the anciēt custome of France; although the sub­stāce be deduced from the first kings of the Hebrews, as appeareth by the annointing of king Saule: whereof Dauid (you say) made great accompt, notwithstan­ding that Saule had bene reiected by God, and that himselfe had lawfully borne armes against him.

Out Atheist; you would be dawbed with dung, & haue the most vile filth of your stewes cast in your face. Did Dauid beare armes against his annointed king? did he euer lift vp his eye-lids against him? did he euer so much as defend himselfe otherwise then by flight? It is certaine that Shemei did not halfe so cruel­ly either curse or reuile this holy man, who did so much both by speech and action detest this fact, that he would rather haue endured ten thousand deaths, then to haue defiled his soule with so damnable a thought. What then shall we say vnto you, who to set vp sedition and tumult, abuse all diuine & humane wrightings, in whatsoeuer you beleeue will aduance your purpose? who spend some speech of respect vn­to kings for allurement onely, to draw vs more deepe into your deceit? Shall we giue any further eare to your doctrine, both blasphemous and bloudy? We will heare you to the end; and I deceiue my selfe, but your owne tale shall, in any moderate iudgement, condemne the authoritie of your opinions for euer.

Let vs come then to your last example (which is neither the last nor the least whereat you leuell.) And that is of England, which of all other kingdomes [Page] (you say) hath most particularly taken this ceremony of Sacring and annointing from France. Well, let the ceremonie be taken from whence you please: if the oath be no other then you do specifie, To obserue peace, honour and reuerence, vnto Almighty God, to his Church and to the Ministers of the same, to administer Law and Iustice equally to all; to abrogate euill lawes and customes, and maintaine good (which was the oath of king Richard the first; the like whereto was that of king Iohn, altered only in the first branch: To loue and defend the Catholicke Church:) If the oath be no other I say, I do not see what other answer you need to ex­pect, but that it is onely a free royall promise, to dis­charge that duty which God doth impose. And this is plainely declared by the speech which you alleage, of Thomas Arundell Archbishop of Canterbury, to king Henry the fourth; Remember (saith he) the oath which voluntarily you made: voluntarily he sayd, and not necessarily: it was voluntary in oath, but ne­cessary in duty. That which you report also that Tho­mas Becket did write vnto king Henry the second, importeth nothing else but an acknowledgement of duty: Remember (said he) the confession which you made.

I cannot omit your description of the manner of the Coronation in England. First (you say) the king i [...] sworne; then the Archbishop declareth to the peo­ple what he hath sworne, and demaundeth if they be content to submit themselues vnto him vnder those conditions: whereunto they consenting, he putteth on the royall ornaments; and then addeth the words of commission: Stand and hold thy place, and keepe thy oath. And thus you haue hammered out a formall [Page] election, supposing that you draw together the pee­ces of falshood so close, that no man can perceiue the seame. The truth is, that king Henry the fourth being not the nearest in bloud to the inheritance of the crowne, did countenance his violence with the election of the people; not at his Coronation, but in a Parliament that was holden before. And therefore you do impudently abuse vs; First, in ioyning them together as one act; Secondly, by falsifying diuerse points in both; Lastly, by insinuating that the same order was obserued by other kings.

The points which you falsifie are these: The inter­rogation of the Archbishop to the people: the absurd straining of these words, Stand, hold thy place, to be a Commission: the alleaging also out of Stow, 1. That the Archbishop did reade vnto the people, what the King was bound vnto by oath; 2. That the Earle of Northumberland did shew a ring vnto the people, that they might thereby see the band whereby the king was bound vnto them; 3. That the king did pray, that he might obserue his promise. In which composition of conceits, you shew how actiue you are in counter­faiting any thing, that may make to your purpose; perswading your selfe, that it is no fraud vnto God, to deceiue the world in a lye for aduantage.

King Edward the fourth also (because his right was litigious, & another was in possession of the crowne) strengthened, or rather countenanced his title with the approbation of the people. But where you write, that at the Coronation of King Edward the sixth, Queene Mary, and Queene Elizabeth, the consent and acceptation of the people was demanded: First, [Page] we haue no cause to credite any thing that you say; then, although it be true, yet not being done in Par­liament, it addeth no right vnto the Prince; but is on­ly a formality, a circumstance only of ceremony and order.

Hereupon you conclude, that a king hath his au­thority, by agreement and contract betweene him & the people: insinuating thereby that he looseth the same, if he either violate or neglect his word. The contrary opinion, that only succession of bloud ma­keth a king, & that the cōsent of the people is nothing necessary, you affirme to be absurd, base and impious, an vnlearned, fond and wicked assertion; in flattery of Princes, to the manifest ruine of common-wealths, and peruerting of all law, order and reason.

I did alwayes foresee that your impostumed sto­macke would belch forth some loathsome matter. But whosoeuer shall compare this confident conclusion with the proofes that you haue made, he will rather iudge you mad then vnwise. This bold blast, vpon grounds that are both foolish and false, bewrayeth ra­ther want then weaknesse of wits. I am ashamed I should offer any further speech in so euident a truth: but since I haue vndertaken to combate an herisie, since the matter is of so great consequence & import, I purpose once againe to giue you a gorge.

Learne then, heauy-headed Cloisterer, vnable to mannage these mysteries of State: Learne of me, I say; for I owe this duty to all Christians: the Prophets, the Apostles, Christ himselfe hath taught vs, to be obe­dient to Princes, though both tyrants and infidels. This ought to stand with vs for a thousand reasons to [...] [Page] submit our selues to such kings, as it pleaseth God to send vnto vs; without either iudging or examining their qualities.Their hearts are in Gods hand; they do his seruice, sometimes in preseruing, sometimes in pu­nishing vs: they execute his iudgement both wayes, in the same measure which he doth prescribe. If they abuse any part of their power, we do not excuse, we do not extenuate it; we do not exempt them from their punishment: let them looke vnto it, let them assuredly expect, that God will dart his vengeance a­gainst thē with a most stiffe and dreadfull arme. In the meane season, we must not oppose our selues, other­wise then by humble sutes and prayers: acknowled­ging, that those euils are alwayes iust for vs to suffer, which are many times vniust for them to do. If we do otherwise; if we breake into tumult and disorder, we resemble those Giants of whom the Poets write; who making offer to scale the skies, and to pul Iupiter out of his throne, were ouerwhelmed in a moment with the mountaines which they had heaped toge­ther. Beleeue it, Cloisterer; or aske any man who is both honest and wise, and he will tell you: It is a rule in reason, a triall in experience, an authority confir­med by the best, that rebellion produceth more hor­rible effects, then either the tyranny or insufficiency of any Prince.

YOV begin (after your manner) with a carreir against Billay; but because both I haue not seene what he hath written, and dare not credite what you report, I will not set in foote betweene you.

In breaking from this, you preferre succession of Princes before free election, as well for other respects, as for the preeminence of auncetrie in birth, which is so much priuiledged in the Scripture: and yet not made so inuiolable (you say) but vpon iust causes it might be inuerted; as it appeareth by the examples of Iacob, Iuda and Salomon. And this libertie you hold to be the principall remedie for such inconueniences as do ensue of the course of succession; as if the next in birth be vnable or pernicious to gouerne: in which cases, if he be not capable of directions and counsels, you affirme that the remedie is to remoue him. And so you make succession and election, the one to be a preseruatiue to the other; supposing, that the difficul­culties of both are taken away: First, if ordinarily [...] [Page] succession taketh place; then, if vpon occasion we giue allowance to election.

For the prerogatiue of birth, as also for the speciall choice which God hath often made of the yongest, I will remit my selfe to that which I haue written be­fore Cap. 1.. At once: in those particular actions which God hath either done, or by expresse Oracle com­maunded, contrarie to the generall lawes which he hath giuen vs; as in the robberie of the Aegyptians, the extirpation of the Amalekites, the insurrection of Iehu, and such like; we are bound to the law, and not to the example. God hath giuen vs a naturall law, to preferre the first borne; he hath often made choice of the yongest, because he commonly wor­keth greatest effects, by meanes not onely weake, but extraordinary; as it appeareth by the birth of Isaak. But that these speciall elections of God are not proposed for imitation to vs, hereby it is eui­dent; because they haue bene for the most part, without defect in the one, or demerite in the other. And especially in this example of Iacob and Esau; Saint Paule sayth Rom. 9.13. that it was not grounded vpon their workes, but vppon the will and pleasure of God; for before they had done good or euill, be­fore they were borne, God sayd: Gen 25.23. The eldest shall serue the youngest. Which if we might imitate, the priuiledge of birth were giuen in vaine.

For your deuice in ioyning election to succes­sion, whereby one of them should remedie the diffi­culties of the other, it is a meere vtopicall conceipt: what else shall I tearme it? an imposture of state, a dreame, an illusion, fit only to surprise the iudgement [Page] of the weake and ignorant multitude. These toyes are alwaies hatched by the discoursiue sort of men, rather then the actiue; being matters more in imagi­nation then in vse: and herein two respects do princi­pally oppose against you.

The first is, for that in most nations of the world, the people haue lost all power of election; and succes­sion is firmely setled in one discent, as before I haue declared Cap. j.

The second is, for that more fierie factions are hereby kindled, then where succession or election are meere without mixture. For where one claimeth the Crowne by succession, and another possesseth it by ti­tle of election; there, not a disunion onely of the peo­ple, not a diuision in armes, but a cruel throat-cutting, a most immortall and mercilesse butcherie doth vsu­ally ensue. It is somwhat inconuenient (I grant) to be gouerned by a Prince either impotent or euill; but it is a greater inconuenience, by making a breach into this high point of state, to open a way to all manner of ambitions, periuries, cruelties and spoile: whereto the nature of the common-people would giue a great furtherance, who being weake in wisedome, violent in will; soone wearie of quiet, alwaies desirous of chaunge, and most especially in matters of state, are easily made seruiceable to any mans aspiring de­sires. This I haue manifested before Cap. 3., by the exam­ples of king Edward and king Richard, both surna­med the Second: who were not insupportable either in nature or in rule; & yet the people more vpon wan­tonnes then for any want, did take an vnbridled course against them. And thus is your high pollicie nothing [Page] else but a deepe deceipt; thus whilest you striue with the wings of your wit to mount aboue the cloudes of other mens conceipt, you sinke into a sea of absurdities and errors.

After this, you determine two questions; the first is, What respect is to be attributed to propinquitie of bloud onely. Whereto you answer, that it is the prin­cipall circumstance which leadeth vs to the next suc­cession of the Crowne, if other circumstances and conditions doe concurre, which were appointed at the same time, when the lawe of succession was esta­blished. Assuredly you can neuer shewe either when, or by whome, this lawe of succession was first instituted, except perhappes by some Nimrod, when hee had brought the necke of a people vnder his sword: at which time, what conditions hee would set downe to bee required from his successour, any ordinarie iudgement may coniecture at ease. Well, since you set vs to seeke for proofe of this, to that which you haue written before, I will also send you backe to the same place Cap j. for your answer.

The second question is, What interest a Prince hath to his kingdome, before he be crowned. This you resolue by certaine comparisons; and first you write, that it is the same which the Germaine Empe­rour hath before his coronation. But that is so large, that some Emperours haue neuer bene crowned; others haue deferred it for many yeares; among which Metrop. l. 3. cap. 20. Crantzius writeth, that Otho the first recei­ued the Crowne of the Empire, in the eight and twentieth yeare of his raigne. And yet is not this com­parison full to the question propounded; because in [Page] electiue states there is not held one perpetuall conti­nuance of royaltie, as is in those that are successiue. And In Prooem. decret. Panormitane saith, That an argument a simili­bus is not good, if any difference can bee assigned. Much more vnfitly doe you affirme, that it is no greater then a Maior of London hath in his office, before hee hath taken his oath: for it is odiously ab­surd, to compare the authoritie of an absolute Prince by succession, to the authoritie of an Officer, both electiue and also subiect.

But it is the example of mariage (you say) where­by this matter is made more plaine: for as in this con­tract there is an espousall, by promise of a future act, and a perfect mariage by yeelding present consent; the first is, when both parties doe mutually promise that they will; the second, that they do take one the other for husband and wife: so an heire apparant, by propinquitie of bloud is espoused onely to the Com­monwealth, and maried afterward at his coronation, by oathes of either partie, and by putting on the ring, and other wedding garments. But how were Kings maried in former ages? how are they now maried in those countries, where they haue neither ring, nor wedding garment, nor also any oath? What? is euery office and degree which is taken with ceremonie, to be esteemed likewise a mariage? Or if you will haue coronation onely to bee a mariage, what else can it resemble, but the publike celebration of matri­monie betweene man and woman? which addeth nothing to the substance of contract, but onely mani­festeth it to the world.

These pitifull proofes, naked of authoritie, emptie [Page] of sence, deserue rather to be excused then answered: I will helpe therefore in some sort to excuse them. They are the best that your starued both cause and conceipt can possibly affoord: and you haue also some fellowes in your folly. Heliogabalus did solemnely ioyne the statues of the Sunne and of the Moone in mariage together. Nero was maried to a man, and tooke also a man to his wife. The Venetians doe yearely vpon Ascention day, by a ring and other ce­remonies, contract mariage with the sea.

But now in earnest; men do dye whensoeuer it pleaseth God to call them: but it is a Maxime in the common law of England: Rex nunquam moritur; The king is alwaies actually in life. In Fraunce also the same custome hath bene obserued; and for more assurance it was expresly enacted vnder About the yeare, [...]375. Charles the fifth: That after the death of any king, his eldest sonne should in­continently succeede. For which cause the Parliamēt court of Paris doth accompanie the funeral obsequies of those that haue bene their kings, not in mourning attire, but in scarlet; the true ensigne of the neuer-dy­ing Maiestie of the Crowne.

In regard of this certaine and incontinent succes­sion, the In c. v [...]t. 24 q. 1. Glossographer vpon the Decrees noteth: That the sonne of a king, may be called King during the life of his father, as wanting nothing but admini­stration: wherein he is followed with great applause by In l quesitā. D. de leg. j. Baldus, In c [...] tanta qui fil suat legit. Panormitane, Con [...]. 1 [...]2. l. 2 Iason, Cons [...] 2. li. 1 Carol. Ruinus, In c. 1 tit. quis dicat. dux. An­dreas Iserna, Martinus, Card. Alexander, Ind. pa [...]. c. de re [...]cad. Albericus, In rep [...]ab. de ca. po & prop. Fed. Barbatius, Cons. 262. Philip Decius, In tra [...]t de po. & excel. reg. [...] 25 Ant. Corsetta, In tra [...]t de privil [...]. par. 1. ca. 109. Fra. Luca, In tract. [...]. Matthe, Afflict. And the same also doth Ser­nius note out of Amend. 9. Virgil, where he saith of Ascanius: [Page] Regem (que) requirunt, his father Aeneas being yet aliue.

But so soone as the king departeth out of life, the royaltie is presently transferred to the next successor, according to the lawes and customes of our Realme. All Writs go foorth in his name; all course of iustice is exercised, all Offices are held by his authoritie; all states, all persons, are bound to beare to him alleage­ance: not vnder supposall of approbation when hee shall be crowned, according to your dull and drowsie coniecture, but as being the true Soueraigne king of the Realme.

He that knoweth not this, may (in regard of the af­faires of our state) ioyne himself to S. Anthony, in glo­rying in his ignorance, & professing that he knoweth nothing. Queene Mary raigned three mon [...]ths be­fore she was crowned, in which space the Duke of Northumberland and others were condemned and executed for treason: for treason I say, which they had committed, before she was proclaimed Queene.

King Edward the first was in Palestina, when his father dyed; in which his absence, the Nobilitie and Prelates of the Realme assembled at London, and did acknowledge him for their king. In his returne home­ward, he did homage to the French king, for the lands which he held of him in France. He also repressed cer­taine rebels of Gascoine; amongst whom, Gasco of Bierne, appealed to the court of the king of Fraunce: where king Edward had iudgement, that Gasco had committed treason Walsingh. in E. 1.; and therupon he was deliuered to the pleasure of king Edward. And this hapned be­fore his coronation, which was a yeare and nine mo­n [...]ths after he began to raigne.

[Page]King Henry the sixth was crowned in the eighth yeare of his raigne; and in the meane space, not onely his subiectes did both professe and beare alleageance, but the King of Scottes also did sweare homage vnto him.

What neede I giue any more either instance or ar­gument, in that which is the cleare lawe, the vncon­troulled custome of the Realme? Against which not­withstanding your weather-beatē forehead doth not blush to oppose a blind opinion, that heires apparant are not true kings, although their titles be iust, and their predecessors dead. This you labour to prooue by a few drye coniectures, but especially and aboue all others (you say) because the Realme is asked three times at euery coronation, whether they will haue such a man to be their king or no. First, wee haue good reason to require better proofe of this question then your bare word: secondly, although we admit it to be true, yet seeing the aunswer is not made by the estates of the Realme assembled in parliament, but by a confused concurse (necessarie Officers excepted) of all sorts both of age and sexe, it is for ceremonie only, & not of force, either to giue or to increase any right.

Another of your arguments is, for that the Prince doth first sweare to gouerne well and iustly, before the subiects take their oath of alleageance; which ar­gueth, that before they were not bound. And further you affirme, that it happened onely to king Henry the fifth, among his predecessors, to haue fealtie done vn­to him, before hee was crowned, and had taken his oath. I confesse indeed, that Polydore and St [...]w haue written so; but you might easily haue found that they [Page] write not true; the one of them being a meere straun­ger in our state; the other a man more to be commen­ded for indeuour then for art. King Iohn being in Normandie when his brother dyed, sent into En­gland Hubert Archbishop of Canterburie, VVilliam Marshall Earle of Strigvile, and Geoffrie Fitzpeter Lord chiefe [...]ustice, who assembled the States of the Realme at Northhampton, and tooke of them an oath of obedience to the new king. Also king Anno reg. 23. Henry the third caused the Citizens of London, the Guar­dians of the Cinque-ports, and diuers others, to sweare fealtie to Prince Edward his sonne; who being in Palestina when his father died, the Nobilitie and Prelates of the Realme assembled in the new temple at London, and did acknowledge him for their king. And in like manner, king Edward the third tooke an oath of all the Nobilitie of the Realme, of faith after his death to Richard Prince of Wales: and so did king Henry the first, for his daughter Mawde, and her yong sonne Henry.

After the death of king Henry the fifth, that sub­iects did often sweare alleageance, before the corona­tion and oath of the king, you had neither counte­nance nor conscience to deny: but it was neither of these two which did restraine you; it proceeded one­ly from the force of truth, which will manifest it selfe whatsoeuer art we vse to disguise it. For otherwise, what countenance, what conscience had you to af­firme, that it is expresly noted by our English Histo­riographers: That no alleageance is due vnto kings, before they bee crowned? Who are these Histo­riographers? where doe they so write? you that [Page] search euery dustie corner of your braines, for a fewe ragged reasons to vphold your heresie, should not ei­ther haue mentioned, or omitted such pregnant proofes: for in that you affirme, and do not expresse them, you condemne your selfe by your owne si­lence.

If you meane that which you alleadge out of Poly­dore and Stowe: That an oath of fealtie was neuer made before coronation, vntill the time of king Henry the fifth; it is neither true, nor to any such sence. If you meane that of Polydore in tearming Henry the fift, Prince and not King, before he was crowned; in writing also, that the States did consult in Parlia­ment, De nouo rege creando more maio­rum. of creating a new king after the custome of their auncestors: it is a sleepie ieast, to straine euery word in such an author to proprietie of speech. You might better haue cited, what certaine cities in Fraunce not long since alledged for themselues: That because they had not reputed Henry the fourth for their king, be­cause they had not professed alleageance vnto him, they were not to be adiudged rebels: whereupon notwithstanding the chiefest Lawyers of our age did resolue, that forasmuch as they were originall sub­iects, euen subiects by birth; they were rebels in bea­ring armes against their king, although they had ne­uer professed alleageance. And this is so euidently the lawe of the Realme, that it is presumption in vs both; in you, to assay by your shallow Sophistrie to obscure or impugne; in me, to indeuour by authori­ties and arguments to manifest or defend the same.

But the admission of the people (you say) hath often preuailed against right of succession. So haue [Page] pyrates against merchants; so haue murtherers and theeues against true meaning trauellers. And this dis­loyalty of the people hath moued diuerse kings to cause their sonnes to be crowned during their owne liues; because the vnsetled state of succeeding kings doth giue oportunitie to bouldest attempts; and not as you dreame, because admission is of more impor­tance then succession.

I will examine your examples in the Chapters fol­lowing. In the meane time where you write, that king Henry and king Edward, both called the Fourth, had no better way to appease their minds at the time of their death, but by founding their title vpon con­sent of the people; the Authors Sir Tho. Moore, and Stow. which you cite do plainely charge you with vnexcuseable vntruth. King Edward neuer made question of his right: king Henry did, as some other Authors report Holing­shead.; but ap­plied no such deceiptfull comfort: this false skinne would not then serue to couer his wound.

HERE you present your selfe very pen­siue to your audience, as though you had so ouer-strained your wits with store of examples of the next in succes­sion not admitted to the state, that you had cracked the creadite of them for euer. But you are worthy of blame, either for endangering or trou­bling your selfe in matters of so small aduantage. I haue shewed before, that exāples suffice not to make any proofe; and yet herein doth consist the greatest shew of your strength. It is dangerous for men to be gouerned by examples though good, except they can assure themselues of the same concurrence of reasons, not onely in generall, but in particularities; of the same direction also and cariage in counsell; and last­ly, of the same fauourable fortune: but in actions which are euill, the imitation is commonly worse then the example. Your puffie discourse then is a heape of words without any waight; you make [Page] mountaines, not of Mole-hils, but of moates; long haruest for a small deale, not of corne, but of cockle; and (as one sayd at the shearing of hogges) great crie for a little, and that not very fine wooll.

Yea, but of necessitie something you must say: yea, but this something is no more then nothing. You suppose, that either your opinion will be accep­ted, more for authority of your person, then waight of your proofes; or else that any words will slide easily into the minds of those, who are lulled in the humour of the same inclination; because partialitie will not suffer men to discerne truth, being easily beguiled in things they desire. Besides, whatso­euer countenance you cary, that all your examples are free from exception, yet if you had cast out those which are impertinent, or vniust, or else vn­true, you could not haue beene ouer-charged with the rest.

Your first example, that none of the children of Saule did succeede him in the crowne, is altogether impertinent: because by particular and expresse appointment of God 2. Reg 15. & 16. 2 Reg. 2. & 5., the kingdome was broken from his posteritie. We acknowledge that God is the onely superiour Iudge of supreme Kings, ha­uing absolute both right and power, to dispose and transpose their estates as he please. Neither must we examine his actions by any course of law, because his will is aboue all law. He hath enioyned the people to be obedient to their Kings; he hath not made them equall in authoritie to himselfe. And whereas out of this example you deduce, that the fault of the father may preiudicate the sonnes right, [Page] although he had no part in the fault; to speake mode­rately of you, your iudgement is either deceitfull or weake. God in his high Iustice, doth punish indeed the sinnes of parents vpon their posterity Exod. 20.5.: but for the ordinary course of humane iustice, he hath giuen a law, that the sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father Ezech. 18.20. Ierem. 31.29. Deut. 24.16. 2. Chron. 25.2.: the equity wherof is regularly followed, both by the Ciuill l. siquis sno. § legi [...] C [...]de In o [...]f. test [...] ge­nerali. D [...]e rit. nup. l. siliā. D. de senator. l. adoptiuum. D. de In ius voc. and Canon Dist. 56. per tot. law; and by the interpre­tors of them both gl. et Dd [...]b. et in c. vel non est de temp. ord.

Your second example is of King Salomon, who succeeded in the state of Dauid his father, notwith­standing he was his yongest sonne. But this example in many respects falleth not within the compasse of your case. First, because he was not appointed succes­sor by the people: we speake not what the king and the people may do to direct succession, but what the people may do alone. Secondly, for that the king­dome was not then stablished in succession. Lastly, for that the action was led by two Prophets, Dauid and Nathan, according to the expresse choise and direction of God 1 Chron. 22.8.9.: whereby it is no rule for ordinary right.

Here many points do challenge you of indiscre­tion at the least. You write that Dauid made a pro­mise to Bathsheba in his youth, that Salomon should succeed in his estate: but if you had considered at what yeares Salomon began to raigne, you should haue found, that Dauid could not make any such promise, but he must be a youth about threescore yeares of age. You write also, that Dauid adored his sonne Salomon from his bed: but the words where­with Dauid worshipped were these 3. Reg. 2.48.: Blessed be the [Page] Lord God of Israel, who hath made one to sit on my throne this day, euen in my sight: whereby it is euident, that Dauid adored God and not his son. This I note rather for obseruation of the loosenesse of your iudgement, then for any thing it maketh to the purpose. You are so accustomed to vntruths, that you fall into them, without either aduantage or end.

The like answer may be giuen to your example of Rehoboam; because God declared his sentence therein by two Prophets, Ahijah 3. Reg. 11.31. and Shemaiah 3. Reg. 12.24.. But for that the ten tribes reuolted from Rehoboam, vpō dis­contentment at his rough answer, and with dispite a­gainst Dauid and his house, and not in obedience to Gods decree, we cannot excuse them from offence, for which it turned to their destructiō. For hereupon, first they were separated both from the place & maner of the true worship of God; thē, there arose vnappeas­able war, betweene them & the tribe of Iudah; then, insolencies following disorders, they were neuer long time free from conspiracies, diuisions and tumults: by which meanes being drained both of wealth and in­habitants, and reduced to a naked weaknesse, they were lastly caried captiue into diuerse farre countries, and strangers were sent to inhabite their cities.

I must here also obserue a few of your interpre­tations, wherein your boldnesse is not limited with any bounds. It is to be noted (you say) that be­fore Rehoboam went to Shechem to be admitted by the people, he was not accompted true King. I desire therefore that you would satisfie vs in these places following. Before Rehoboam went to Shechem, the Scripture saith, that Salomon died, [...] [Page] and was buried, and Rehoboam his sonne raigned in his stead 3. Reg. 11.43.. Againe, after the defection of the ten tribes it is sayd, that in the cities of Iudah Rehoboam did raigne still, 3. Reg. 12.17. implying thereby, that in the other cities he raigned before. Againe, they are sayd to haue re­belled against the house of Dauid 3. Reg. 12.19.. And lastly, Reho­boam raised all the strength of Iudah and Beniamin, to bring the kingdome againe vnto him 3. Reg. 12.21..

Further you write, that ten tribes refused to admit Rehoboam; but the Scripture saith that they rebelled 3. Reg. 12.19.. What? did God only allow hereof after it was done? did he only permit the people to do it? the Scripture testifieth that it was his decree, that it was his deed, and that he declared his will by Ahijah the Prophet 3. Reg. 11.31., during the life of Salomon, and for his sins. But these speciall warrants do not constitute a law; they serue onely to make good the particular actions for which they are directed, and not to iustifie another the like. Lastly, S. Paule saith, that all things happened to the Iewes in figure; vpon which place diuerse expositors haue noted, that the state of the Iewes was a figure of the Church of Christ: but that it was an example and patterne of all other states that should ensue, it shall be ranged among your cast conceipts.

I refer me now to the iudgement of any man, who taketh not pleasure to beguile himselfe, whether you do not by art & trumpery manifestly abuse vs; partly by incapacitie, & partly by deceipt, either corrupting or confounding whatsoeuer you take in hand. Your humor both discontented and vnquiet, hath armed your mind with bloudy desires, which haue edged you on to put fewell to those slames, which you shold [Page] endeuour to quench, though it were with your bloud.

I will not stand vpon the particular examples of Spaine, as well for that the matter is both tedious and to litle purpose; as also for that we haue small confor­mitie with the customes of that nation. Onely thus much in generall: We acknowledge that in auncient times the kingdome of Spaine was electiue, and ther­fore your examples drawne from thence are nothing pertinent. The examples of later times, are both few and vniust, caried onely by faction and by force; as Garabay Pa. 414. testifieth of your example of Aurelio, and as by the example of D. Sancho el Brauo I haue declared before Cap. 3.. But you accompt faction to be the Common-wealth, and violence Iustice, when it may make to the furtherance of your affaires.

The Historie of D. Berenguela I will briefly report, rather for the respect which guided the Castilians, then that I allow it for right which they did. Henry had two sisters, Donna Blanch the eldest, maried to Lewes the eight King of Fraunce; and Berenguela the yongest, maried to Alphonso king of Leon. Henry dying without issue, the Castilians feared, if they should submit themselues vnto Blanch, that their state, being lesse then the state of Fraunce, would be made a member thereof, and gouerned as a Prouince, and not as a kingdome. And therefore they did rather chuse to professe allegeāce to the Lady Berenguela; by which meanes, the kingdome of Leon was afterwards annexed vnto Castile, to the great encrease, both of dignitie and assurance to them both. I haue followed herein your owne Authors, not being ignorant that o­thers [Page] of better name do write, that Berenguela was the eldest sister, as I shall haue occasiō hereafter to declare: but for the present let it be as you please; and let vs weigh our owne wisdomes, not only in straining, but in forging titles, to incurre those mischiefes, which the Castilians reiected, a lawfull title to auoid.

And this was also one of the motiues of the reuolt of Portugale, which is your last example; although it had also (as Garabay Lib. 34. pa 833. writeth) a concurrence of right. For Ferdinand king of Portugale, by his procurators, the Bishop of Ebora and others, did both contract and solemnize espousals with Elianor, daughter of Peter king of Aragon. But being entred into war with Henry king of Castile, & finding himself at some disaduātage, he forsooke the king of Arragōs daughter, & cōtracted himself to Elianor, daughter to the king of Castile, vpō very beneficiall conditions for his state. Afterward, falling into fancy with one of his subiects, named Eli­anor Telles de Meneses, wife to a noble man called Lo­renzo Vasques de Acun̄a, he tooke her as his wife, and enforced her husband to auoid the Realme; & had by her one only daughter, named Beatrix, who was ioy­ned in mariage to Iohn king of Castile. After the death of the king of Portugale her father, the king of Castile in the right of his wife, laid claime to that realme, & was accordingly acknowledged by the chiefe of the nobi­lity and Prelats; and in particular, by D. Iohn maister of Auis, her fathers base brother, who was then the most forward man in her fauour. But afterwards falling into quarrell, and hauing slaine the Count de Oren, he stirred the people against the Queene, & cō ­pelled her to quit the city. And after diuerse outrages [Page] and murthers, committed vpon the Bishop of Lis­bone, an Abbesse, and many others, hee was first made gouernour of Portugall; and then procee­ding further, in an assembly of his partie gathered at Coimbra, he was made King. Garrabay wri­teth, pa. 841. that the chiefest obiection against Beatrix was, because her mother was not King Ferdinands law­full wife. And I beleeue you also, that they had a reflexe, not to loose the dignitie of their kingdome (as now they haue done) and be made subiect to the cruell both auarice and ambition of a more po­tent state.

YOur examples of France (to which Nation wee are more neare both in scituation and lawes) I will runne ouer with a swift course. Of the chaunge which twice hath happened in the whole race of the kings of France, I haue spo­ken before: Cap. [...]. you seeme also either to threaten or presage the third chaunge, from the king who [Page] now raigneth, and other Princes of the house of Burbon. It was your desire, you applyed your en­deuour, with all the power and perswasions you could make. You knit diuers of the Nobilitie in a trecherous league against him; you incensed the people; you drew in forren forces to theyr assi­stance: by which meanes, the Realme fell daily in­to chaunge of distresse, the men of armes making all things lawfull to their lust. The good did feare, the euill expect; no place was free, eyther from the rage or suspition of tumult; fewe to bee trusted, none assured, all things in commixtion; the wisest too weake, the strongest too simple, to auoyde the storme which brake vpon them: the people ioyning to their miserable condition many com­plaints, that they had bene abused by you, in whose directions they founde nothing but obstinacie and rashnesse, two daungerous humours to leade a great enterprise. At the last, when lamentable experience had made that knowne vnto them, which they had no capacitie by reason to foresee, they expelled as well your company as counsell out of the Realme; and so the firebrands which you had kindled, were broken vpon your owne heads; ha­uing opportunitie by your iust banishment to enter into conscience, both of the weakenesse and wrong of your aduice.

The partition of the Realme of France between Charles the great, and Carlomon his younger brother, and also the vniting thereof againe in Charles, after the death of Carloman, depended vpon the disposi­tion [Page] of Pepin their father, and not vpon the election of the people. Girard saith, that Lib. 1. de l'estate. fol 43. Pepin hauing dispo­sed all things in his new Realme which hee thought necessarie for the suretie thereof, hee disposed his estate; leauing the Realme of Noion to his sonne Charles; and to Carloman his other sonne, that of Sois­sons, & that by the death of Carloman, both his place and his power did accrue vnto Charles. In this man­ner, the first of a family, who hath attained a king­dome, hath ordinarilye directed the succession thereof.

The contention betweene Lewis le debonaire and his sonnes, according to your owne Author Gi­rard, De l'estate. proceeded and succeeded after this manner. Certaine Lords of France taking discontentment at the immoderate fauours, which the king shewed to­ward Berard his great Chamberlaine, conspired a­gainst him; and for their greater both counte­nance and strength, drew his owne sonnes to bee of their faction. But Lewis brake this broile, more by foresight then by force; and doing execution vpon the principall offenders, pardoned his sonnes. Yet they, interpreting this lenitie to slacknes of courage, rebelled againe, gathered a greater strength, & drew Pope Gregorie the fourth to bee a complice of their vnnaturall impietie: whereby it appeareth (saith Gi­rard) that they are either foolish or mischieuous, who wil affirm, that euery thing is good which the Popes haue done. Afterward they tooke their father, vnder colour of good faith, and sent him prisoner to Tor­tone, & then at Compeigne assembled a Parliament, [Page] composed of their owne confederates, wherin they made him a Monke, & brought his estate into diui­sion & share. It is easie to coniecture (saith the same Girard) what miserable conditions the Realme then endured; all lawes were subuerted, all things expo­sed to the rage of the sworde, the whole realme in combustion, and the people extreamely disconten­ted at this barbarous impietie. In the ende Lewes, by the aide of his faithfull seruants was taken out of prison, and restored to his kingdome; and his sonnes acknowledging their faulte, were receiued by him both to pardon and fauour. His sonne Pepin being dead, he diuided his Realme among his other three sonnes, Charles, Lewes, and Lothaire; but Lewes rebel­led againe, and was again receiued to mercie: lastly, hee stirred a great part of Germanie to reuolt, with griefe whereof the good olde man his Father died. After his death, Lewes and Lothaire, vpon disdaine at the great portion which their Father had assigned to their brother Charles, raised warre against him. The battaile was giuen, wherein Charles remained victo­rious, reducing them both vnder such conditions, as hee thought conuenient to impose. Loe heere one of your plaine and euident examples, which is so free from all exception. But mindes corruptly inclined, holde nothing vnlawfull, nothing vnreaso­nable, which agreeth with their passion.

Loys le Begue, succeded after Charles, not as you affirme, by authoritie of the states, but (as in France at that time it was not vnusuall) by appointment of his father. And wheras you write, that Loys at his first entrance had like to haue bin depriued by the states, [Page] but that calling a Parlament, he made thē many faire promises to haue their good will; it is a very idle vn­truth, as appeareth by the Author whō you auouch. At his death, he left his wife great with childe, who afterward was called Charles the simple. But before he had accomplished the age of 12. yeares, there stept vp in his place, first Loys and Carloman his ba­stard brothers; then Charles surnamed le Gros; and after him Odo Earle of Paris. Then Charles the right heire attained the Crowne; and then againe were raised against him, first Robert, Earle of Angiers; and afterward Ralph king of Burgūdie. But where you attribute these mutations to the authoritie of the states, Girard saith, that they were by faction & vsur­pation of such, who frō the weaknes of their Prince, did make aduantage to their owne ambition; affir­ming plainly, that betweene the death of Loys le Be­gue, & Charles the simple, not one of them who held the crowne of the Realme was lawfull king Di l'estate. lib. 1. pa. 5 [...]., noting further, that the first two races of Kings, were full of cruel parricides & murthers; & that in those times the Realme was oftē trauelled with tempests of seditiō.

Of the vsurpation of Hugh Capet I haue spoken before: Girard writeth, li. [...]. fol. 60. b. that althogh he sought ma­ny shadowes of right, yet his best title was by force, which is the cōmō right of first vsurpers. And wher­as you write, that Henry the first was preferred to the crowne of France before Robert his elder brother: First, it was not by appointment of the states, but of their father; Secondly, Girard maketh the matter doubtfull, affirming, Fol. 63. a that some said he was the youn­ger brother; Lastly, it set vp a dangerous and doubt­full warre betweene them.

[Page]Further, where you write, that William being a bastarde, succeeded Robert his Father in the Du­chie of Normandie, notwithstanding the saide Robert left two brothers in life, it was at that time a custome in France, that bastards did succeed, euen as lawfull children. Thierry bastard of Clouis, had for his partage the kingdome of Austrasie, now called Lorraine. Sigisbert bastard of king Dagobert the first, parted with Clouis the twelfth, his lawfull brother. Loys and Carloman bastards of king Loys le Begue, raig­ned after their Father. But in the third race of the kings of France, a law was made, that bastards should not succeed in the Crowne; and yet other bastards of great houses were stil aduowed, the French being then of the same opinion with Peleus in Euripides. In Andro­mache.

Oftentimes many bastardes excell those that are lawfully borne: which is verified by Hercules, Alex­ander the great, Romulus, Timotheus, Themistocles, Homer, Demosthenes, Brutus, Bion, Bartolus, Gratian, Pe­ter Lombard, Peter Comesior, Io. Andreas, and diuers other of most flourishing name.

Your examples of Lewes the 6. and Lewes the 11. are not worth a word in answere. In the beginning of their raigne, you affirme that they had like to haue beene disinherited by the state, for the offences of their Father. You beare a minde charged with thoughtes vaine, busie and bolde, without any re­streint either of honestie or of discretion. For how [Page] else could you here also affirme, that King Henry the third of England, was condemned by his Barons to be disinherited, for the fault of his Father? It is vsu­all with you in all your reports, either plainely to breake beyond the boundes of all truth, or grossely, (for I cannot now say artificially) to disguise it, with many false and deceiueable termes. But to conclude for the state of France, which is also to exclude what­soeuer you haue said; vnder the raigne of Charles the fift, 1375. for the better establishment of this right, and for cutting of those calamities which accompanie vsurpatiō, there was a lawe made, that after the death of any King, the eldest sonne should incontinently succeede.

We are now come to our English examples, of which you might haue omitted those of the Saxon kings; as well for that there could be no setled forme of gouernment in those tumultuous times, as also for that our Histories of that age are very imperfect, not leading vs in the circumstances, either of the maner or occasion of particular actions: they declare in grosse what things were done, without further ope­ning, either how or wherefore. But both these doe make for your aduantage: for who seeth not, that your exāples are chiefly bred in tempestuous times; and the obscuritie of Histories will serue for a sha­dowe to darken your deceit.

Well, let vs take both the times and Histories as they are. How will you maintaine that Egbert was not next successour to Briticus by propinquitie of blood? Briticus left no children, and Egbert was des­cended [Page] of the blood royall, as Polydore affirmeth, Lib 4. circa sin. William Malmesbury De gest. Ang. lib. 1. ca. 2. saith, that he was the only man aliue of the royall blood, being descended of Inegild, the brother of King Ina. How then is it true which you say, that Britricus was the last of the roial descēt? and if it had beene so indeede, the right of election should then haue bene in the state. And thus you stumble at euery step, you entangle your selfe with­out truth or ende. You snatch at the words of Poly­dore, where he saith; He is created king by consent of all: which doe imply no other sense, but that which a little after he saith; That he was saluted king by all. So we finde also, that the like improper speech was vsed at the coronatiō of Philip the second, king of France, whereby the Archbishop of Reimes did challenge power in the right of his Sea, to make election of the king.

That Adelstane was illegitimate, you follow Po­lydore, a man of no great either industrie or iudge­ment. William Malmesbury Lib. 2. ca. 5. accounted Egwina the mother of Adelstane, to be the first wife of king Ed­ward his father: he termeth her also a noble woman, contrary to that which Polydore fableth. Henry Hun­tington, Roger Houeden and others, write no other­wise of him, but as of one that was lawfully borne. And in that you english these words of Polydore, Rex dicitur; Rex a populo salutatur; Hee was made king by the people: In that you affirme also, that for the opi­nion of his valure hee was preferred before his bre­thren which were lawfully borne, whome you ac­knowledge to be men of most excellent both expec­tation [Page] and proofe; you doe plainly shewe, that vse hath made you too open in straining of truth.

Eldred did first take vpon him but as Protector, because of the minoritie of the sonnes of Edmund his elder brother; and afterward entred into ful pos­session of the Crowne. But that his nephewes were put backe by the Realme, it is your owne idle inuen­tion; it was no more the act of the realme, then was the vsurpation of King Richard the third.

That Edwin was deposed from his estate, it is in­excusably vntrue. Polydore Lib. 6. writeth, that the Nor­thumbrians and Mercians not fully setled in subiec­tion, made a reuolt. Malmesburie Lib. 2 ca. 8. saith, that hee was maimed of a great part of his kingdome, by the stroke of which iniurie he ended his life. And whereas you write in commendation of King Ed­gar his next successor, that he kept a Nauie of 6600. shippes for defence of the Realme, you discouer your defectiue iudgement in embracing such re­ports for true.

In that you say, that many good men of the Realme were of opinion, not to admit the succes­sion of Etheldred after the death of his brother, I dare confidently affirme, that you doe not only tel, but make an vntruth; hauing no author either to ex­cuse or countenance the same. In that you write al­so, that betweene the death of Edmund Ironside, and the raigne of William Conquerour, it did plainly ap­peare what interest the Common-wealth hath to alter titles of succession; it doth plainly appeare, that both your reason and your conscience is become slauish to your violent desire. For what either liber­tie [Page] or power had the Common-wealth vnder the barbarous rage and oppression of the Danes? when Canutus had spread the winges of his fortune ouer the whole Realme, none hauing either heart or po­wer to oppose against him, what choise was then left vnto the people? what roome for right? what man not banished from sobrietie of sence woulde euer haue saide, that hee was admitted king by the whole Parliament and consent of the Realme? It is true, that after he had both violently and vniustly obtained full possession of the Realme, slaine the brother of Edmund Ironside, and conueied his chil­dren into Sueden, he assembled the Nobilitie, and caused himselfe to be crowned king: but neither the forme nor name of a Parliament was then knowne in Englande; and if coronation were suf­ficient to make a title, no king should be accoun­ted to vsurpe.

Of Harold the first, the naturall sonne of Canu­tus, our Histories doe verie differently report. Saxo Grammaticus writeth, that he was neuer king, but that he died before his Father. Henry of Huntington reporteth, that he was appointed but as Regent for his brother Hardicanutus. Others write, that appre­hending the opportunitie of his brothers absence, he inuaded Northumberland and Mercia, by force of the Danes who were in Englande, wherevpon the Realme was diuided, one part holding for Ha­rolde, and another for Hardicanutus, who was in Denmarke. But because hee delayed to come in­to England, they all fell, rather not to denie then to acknowledge Harold for their king. Take now [Page] which of these reports you please, for all do serue to your purpose alike.

Hardicanutus after the death of Harold, came out of Denmarke into Englande: and the people ha­uing their courages broken with bondage, were easie to entertaine the strongest pretender. But af­ter his death, diuers of the Nobilitie, especially Godwine Earle of Kent, rising into hope to shake off theyr shoulders the importable yoake of the Danes, aduaunced Edwarde the sonne of Ethel­dred to the Crowne, as being the next of the race of the Saxon Kings, though not in blood, yet at hand; for Edward the outlawe his elder brother, was then in Hungarie: and feare being the only knot that had fastened the people to the Danish Kings, that once vntied, they all scattered from them, like so many birdes whose cage had bene broken. Edward being dead, Harold the sonne of Godwine vsurped the kingdome: for as Malmesburie saith; Extoria a principibus fide arripuit diadema. By extorted faith frō the nobilitie he fastned vpon the Crowne a forceable gripe: Henry Huntington also, and out of him Polydore doe write, that vpon confidence of his power he inuaded the Crowne Viribus & genere fretus regni Diade­ma inuasit.: which vsur­pation gaue both encouragement and successe to the enterprise of the Normanes. This short pas­sage of Historie you doe defile with so many vn­truthes, that it seemeth you haue as naturall a gift to falsifie, as to eate, drinke, or sleepe.

But where you write that William the Con­queror formed any title by cōsent of the realme, you grow into the degree of ridiculous. We finde that he pretended the institution of king Edward, which [Page] had neither probabilitie norforce; and that he was nearer to him in blood, then Harold the vsurper: but that hee euer pretended the election of the people, it is your own clowted cōceit. For whē he had row­ted the English armie in the field, when hee had sac­ked their Townes, harried their Villages, slain much people, and bent his sworde against the brests of the rest, what free election could they then make? Your selfe acknowlede also in another place, In part. 2. ca. 2. pa 12. that hee came to the Crowne by dinte of sworde; and at his death his owne conscience constrained him to confesse, that hee tooke it without right Lib. vit Will. conq.. And in that the Pope and the French King fauoured his enterprise, it is not materiall, this was not the first iniustice which they haue assisted. Neither was it the Popes hallowed banner (as you affirme) but the bowe and the arrowe, the only weapon of ad­uantage long time after to this Nation, whereby hee did obtaine the victorie. One helpe hee had also within the Realme, for that King Edward had aduanced diuers Normans, to high place both of dignitie and charge; who gaue vnto him muche secret both incouragement and assistance in his at­tempt.

And thus in all these turbulent times, you are so farre from finding fiue or sixe, that you are short of any one, who was made King by free authoritie of the people.

King William Rufus made no other title to the Crowne, but the testament of his Father: For often vse hath confirmed it for lawe, that a Victor [Page] may freely dispose of the succession of that state, which hee hath obtained by the purchase of his sword. Cin. & Bar­tol. in l. im­perialis. C. de nupt. The conquerer disinherited his eldest son Robert, for that, knitting with Philip King of France, he inuaded, wasted and spoiled Normandie, and ioy­ned in open battell against his father, wherein the fa­ther was vnhorsed and wounded, and brought to a desperate distresse of his life. Herevpon he cast forth a cruel curse against his sonne, which he could neuer be entreated to reuoke: in so much as vpō his death­bed he said of him Lib. Vitj. Will. conq., that it was a miserable coun­trey which should bee subiect to his dominion, for that he was a proud and foolish knaue, & to be long scourged with cruell fortune. And wheras you write that at the time of his fathers death he was absent in the warre of Hierusalem, it is a very negligent vn­truth.

But it is an idle vntruth that you write, that Hen­ry the first had no other title to the crowne, but the election of the people. He neuer was elected by the people; he neuer pretended any such title. Nubrigen­sis Lib. 1. cap 3. & after him Polydore In Henr. 1. sol. 181. do report, that he laid his title, because he was borne after his father was king. Malmesburie In Henr. 1. lib. 5. saith; Henry, the youngest sonne of Wil­liam the great, being an Infant, according to the desires and wishes of all men was excellently brought vp, Quod solus omnium filio­rum Willielminatus est re­gie, & ei reg­num videretur competere. be­cause he alone of all the sonnes of William, was princely borne, and the kingdome seemed to appertaine vnto him. He was borne in England in the third yeare after his fa­ther entred into it. And this was the like controuersie to that which Herodotus In polyhim [...]n reporteth, to haue happe­ned betweene the sonnes of Darius, the sonne of [Page] Hystaspis, king of Persia, when hee prepared an expe­dition against the Grecians and Aegyptians: because by the lawes of Persia, the king might not enter into enterprise of armes, before he had declared his suc­cessor. Darius had three children before he was king, by his first wife, the daughter of Gobris: and after he attained the kingdome he had other foure, by Atos­sa, the daughter of Cyrus. Artabazanes was eldest of the first sort; Xerxes of the second. Artabazanes alled­ged, that he was eldest of all the Kings children; and that it was the custome amongst all men, that the el­dest should enioy the principalitie. Xerxes alledged, that he was begotten of Atossa, the daughter of that king, by whose puissance the Persians had gained, not onely libertie, but also power. Before Darius had giuen sentence, Demaratus the sonne of Aristo, cast out of his kingdome of Sparta, came vnto Xerxes, and aduised him to alledge further, that he was the eldest sonne of Darius after he was king: and that it was the custome of Sparta, that if any man had chil­dren in priuate estate, and afterward an other sonne when he was king, this last sonne should be his suc­cessor: vpon which ground Darius pronounced in the behalfe of Xerxes. The same historie is reported by Iustine Lib. 2., and touched also by Plutarch Lib. de fra­acrna bene­uolentia., al­though they differ, both from Herodotus, and one frō the other in some points of circumstance. Hereto also agreeth that which Iosephus writeth Antiq. lib. 16 cap 3., in repre­hending king Herod, for excluding Alexander and Aristobulus his sonnes, and appointing Antipater, borne to him in priuate estate, to succeed in his king­dome.

[Page]Many great Lawiers haue subscribed their opi­nions to this kinde of title; and namely Pet. Cynus, Baldus, Albericus, Raph. Fulgosius In l. impe­rialis. § illud. C de nupt., Rebuffus In l. si le­natus C. de dignit. lib. 12.; and Anto. Corsetta In tract. de pot. & excell. reg §. 16. deliuereth it for a common opini­on. But with this exception, if the kingdome be ac­quired by any other title then by succession, accor­ding to proximitie in bloud: for in this case, because the dignitie is inherent in the stocke, the eldest sonne shall succeede, although he were borne before his fa­ther was King Pet. Iac. in arb. success. reg Franc. 10. Rai. in cap. praeterea. tit. de prohis seud. ali & in tract. nobil quest. 10. Iac. a S. Georg. in tract. seud. D. Benedic. in rep. c. Rai­nuitius. n. 200. de testam.. And therefore Plutarch wri­teth In Arrax­erxe. that after the kingdome of Persia was setled in succession, when Darius the King had foure sonnes, Artaxerxes the eldest, Cyrus the next, and two other; Parysatis his wife hauing a desire that Cyrus should succeede in the kingdome, pressed in his behalfe the same reason wherewith Xerxes had preuailed before: affirming, that shee had brought forth Artaxerxes to Darius, when hee was a priuate man; but Cyrus, when he was a king. Yet Plu­tarch writeth, that the reason which shee vsed was nothing probable; and that the eldest was designed to be King.

Howsoeuer the right stoode betweene Robert Duke of Normandie, and his younger brothers, the facte did not stande eyther with the quiet or safetie of the Realme. For, during the raigne of VVil­liam Rufus, it was often infested vpon this quarell, both with forren armes and ciuill seditions; which possessed all places with disorder, and many also with fire, rapine and bloud, the principall effects of a li [...]en­tious warre.

[Page]These mischiefes not onely continued but encrea­sed in the raigne of King Henry, vntill Robert the el­dest brother was taken prisoner in the fielde, which put a period to all his attempts. So dangerous it is vp­on any pretence to put bye the next in succession to the crowne.

This Henry the first left but one daughter, and by her a young sonne named Henry, to whom hee ap­poynted the succession of the Realme: and tooke an oath of all the Bishops, and likewise of the Nobilitie, to remaine faithfull vnto them after his decease. Yet you write, that because Stephen, sonne of Adela, sister to King Henry, was thought by the states more fit to gouerne, he was by them admitted to the Crowne. In which assertion, you cannot be deceiued, you do not erre; but your passion doth pull you from your owne knowledge and iudgement. Polydore wri­teth, Lib. 12. in prin. that hee possessed the kingdome contrary to his oath, for which cause the mindes of all men were exceedingly mooued: some did abhorre and detest the impietie; others, and those very fewe, vnminde­full of periurie, did more boldely then honestly al­lowe it, and followed his part. Further he saith, Ibidem. that he was crowned at Westminster, in an assembly of those noble men who were his friendes. Nubrigensis affirmeth, that Sacramenti praeuaricator regnum in va­sit. violating his oath hee inuaded the kingdome.

William Malmesburie, who liued in King Stephens time, saith In hist. [...] ­uel lib. 1. sol. 101. a.; that he was the first of all lay men, next the King of Scots, who had made oath to the Em­presse Mawde; and that he was crowned, Tribus epis­copis praesen­tibus, nullis abbatibus, paucissimis optimatibus. three Bi­shops being present (of whom one was his brother) [Page] no Abbot, and a very fewe of the Nobilitie. Henry Huntington, who liued also in the same time, saith lib. 8 pa 221. Vigore & im­pudentia [...]re­tus.; that by force and impudencie tempting God, he in­uaded the Crowne. Afterward he reporteth Pa. 221., that being desirous to haue his sonne Eustace crowned king with him, the Bishops withstood it, vpon com­maundement from the Pope: because hee tooke vpō him the kingdom against his oath Quia regnum contra iusiu. randum p [...]ae­ripuisse vide­batur., Roger Houe­den writeth Pa. 275. quasi tempe­stas inuasit., that he inuaded the Crowne in man­ner of a tempest.

This is the report of those writers who came nearest, both to the time and truth of this action: whom other Authors do likewise follow. Polydore In prine li. 12, and after him Hollingshead do write, that he tooke vpon him the Crowne, In Steph. partly vpon confidence in the power of Theobald his brother, Earle of Blois; and partly by the aid of Hen. his other brother Bishop of Winchester. Walsinghame addeth Hypodig. pa., 8., that Hugh Bigot, who had bene King Henries Steward, tooke an oath before the Archbishoppe of Canterburie, that King Henry at his death appointed Stephen to be his suc­cessour. Wherevpon the Archbishop and a fewe others were ouer-lightly ledde, like men blinded with securitie, and of little foresight: neuer conside­ring of daungers, vntill the meanes of remedie were past.

You write that they thought they might haue d [...]ne this with a good conscience, for the good of the Realme. But what good conscience could they haue in defiling their faith? such consciences you endeuour to frame in all men, to breake an oathe with as great facilitie, as a Squirrell can cracke a [Page] Nut. What good also did ensue vnto the Realme? The Nobilitie were set into factions; the common people into diuision and disorder: and as in warres where discipline is at large, there insolencies are infi­nite; so in this confusion of the state, there was no ac­tion which tended not to the ruine thereof; the liues and goods of men remaining in continuall pillage. Polydore saith Lib. 12. pa. 107.: Matrons were violated, virgins raui­shed, Churches spoiled, Townes and Villages rased, much cattle destroied, innumerable men slaine. Into this mise­rable face of extremities the Realme did fall; & into the same againe you striue to reduce it.

But you say, that for the ending of these mis­chiefes, the States in a Parliament at Wallingford made an agreement, that Stephen should be King du­ring his life, and that Henry and his offspring should succeede after his death. A man would thinke you had a mint of fables; there is no historie which you handle, but you defile it with apish vntruthes. All our histories agree, that king Stephen, vnable to range things into better forme, did adopt Henry to be his successor. The second Huntington faith Pa 228., that this agreement was mediated, by the Archb. of Cant. and the Bishop of Winchester, who repented him of the furtherance he gaue to the aduancement of king Stephen, when he sawe what miseries did therevpon ensue. The like doth Houeden report Fol. 281.2.: and Holings­head Pa. 62. setteth downe the forme of the charter o [...] a­greement betweene them; whereby it is euident, that it was a transaction betweene them two, and no compulsorie act or authoritie of the State. I de­nie not but some Authors affirme, that the King [Page] assembled the Nobilitie, but neyther were they the States of the Realme, neither were they assem­bled to any other ende, but to sweare fealtie vnto Henry, sauing the kings honour so long as hee should liue.

After the death of King Richard the first, you af­firme that the succession was againe broken; for that Iohn, brother to King Richard, was admitted by the States, and Arthur Duke of Britaine, sonne to Geoffrye, elder brother vnto Iohn, was against the or­dinarie course of succession excluded. Well sir, I ar­rest your worde; remember this I pray you, for I will put you in minde thereof in an other place. That which here you affirme to be against the ordi­narie course of succession, you bring in an other place for proofe, that the Vncle hath right before the Nephewe. You do wildely wauer in varietie of opinion, speaking flatte contraries, according as the ague of your passion is eyther in fitte or intermis­sion.

The Historie of King Iohn standeth thus. King Richard the first dying without issue, left behinde him a brother named Iohn, and a Nephewe called Arthur, sonne of Geoffrye, who was elder brother vnto Iohn. This Arthur was appointed by King Richard to succeede in his estate, as Polydore wri­teth Lib. 15. in prin.. Nubrigensis saith, that he should haue bene established by consent of the Nobilitie, if the Bri­taines had not bene so foolishly, eyther suspiti­ous or fonde, that when King Richard sent for him, they refused to commit him into his Vncles hands.

[Page]But after the death of king Richard, his brother Iohn seized vpon his treasure in Normandie, came ouer into England, and in an assembly onely of the Nobi­litie, was crowned king. Of these, many he wonne with such liberall protestations and promises, as men carelesse of their word are wont to bestowe: others were abused by the perswasions of Hubert Archbi­shop of Canterburie, and a fewe others (saith Poly­dore Lib. 15 pa. 262.) not well aduised.

Nic. Triuet saith In prologo., that Iohn pretended for his title, not the election of the people, but propinquitie of bloud Iure propin­quitatis., and the testament of king Richard. The same also is affirmed by Walsingham Hypodig. po. 50.. And this is the question betweene the Vncle and the Nephewe, of which I shall haue occasion to speake hereafter. But Polydore saith Lib. 15. pa. 263., that diuers noble men did account this to be a fraudulent iniustice, and therevpon did ominate those euils which afterward did ensue. And when the Archbishop was charged, that vnder co­lour of reason, partly subborned, and partly weake, he had bene the occasion of all those mischiefes. Po­lydore Pa, 269. saith, that he was both grieued and ashamed at nothing more; Rog. Wenden affirmeth, that he ex­cused himselfe, that he did it vpon oracles, and by the gift of prophesie.

King Iohn hauing locked himselfe into the sad­dle of state, made one wrong which he had done, to be the cause of a greater wrong; by murthering his Nephew, Arthur, Duke of Britane, whose inheritāce he did vniustly vsurpe. For this fact the French king depriued him of all the landes which he helde in fee of the crowne of France, & prosecuted the sentence [Page] to effect. After this, as men are easily imboldened a­gainst an vsurper, when once he declineth eyther in reputation or in state, diuers of the Nobilitie, especi­ally they of the North, confederated against him: but being neither able to endure his warre, nor wil­ling to repose trust in his peace, they cōtracted with Lewis the French kings sonne, to take vpon him to be their king. And so it often happeneth in ciuill con­tentions, that they who are weakest, do runne with a naturall rashnesse to call in a third.

Lewes being arriued vpon the coast of Kent, the Nobilitie of that faction Walsing. hypodigm [...]. pa. 56., came and sware allea­geance vnto him. The Londoners also, many vpon an ordinarie desire to haue new kings, others for feare, and [...]ome for company, ioyned to the reuolt. Hereof a lamentable presence of all miseries did a­rise, whereby as well the libertie as the dignitie of the Realme, were brought to a neare and narrowe iumpe. The poore people, naked both of helpe and hope, stood at the curtesie and pleasure of the men of armes; the libertie of warre making all things lawfull to the furie of the strongest. The Nobilitie, feeling much, and fearing more the insolencie of the French Natiō, who (as Vicount Melin a noble mā of France confessed at his death) had sworne the extirpation of all the noble bloud in the Realme, began to deuise, how they might returne into the alleageance of king Iohn: in so much as a litle before his death, Letters were b [...]ought vnto him from certaine of his Barons, to the number of fortie, who desired to be receiued againe into his peace. But after his death, which hap­pily did happen within fiue moneths after the arri­uall of the French, both their hatred and their feare [Page] being at an ende, they were all as readie to cast out Lewes, as they had bene rash to call him in.

This History you corrupt with verie many odi­ous vntruthes, which are more harsh to a well tuned eare, then the crashing of teeth, or the grating of cop­per. As namely in affirming, that Arthur was exclu­ded, and Iohn crowned King by the states of the Realme; that God did more defend this act of the Common-wealth, then the iust title of Arthur; that by the same states, king Iohn was reiected, Prince Hē ­ry his sonne depriued, and Lewes of France chosen to be king; that the same states recalled their sentence against Prince Henry, disanulling their oathe and al­leageance made vnto Lewes. A shamelesse tongue, gouerned by a deceitfull minde, can easily call, facti­on, the Common wealth; rebellion, a iust and iudi­ciall proceeding; open an often periurie, an orderly reuoking of a sentence; Gods secret iudgement in permitting iniustice to preuaile, a plain defence and allowance thereof.

Of the diuision of the houses of Lancastar and Yorke, it is but little that you write, whereto I haue fully answered before: you do wisely to giue a light touch to this example, it is so hotte that it will scalde your throate. King Henry the fourth, more caried by cursed ambition, then either by necessitie or right, laide an vniust gripe vpon the Realme, which after­ward he did beautifie with the counterfeit titles of conquest and election. So violent are the desires of Princes to imbrace streined titles, by whiche they may disturbe the states of other; not remembring, that right may be troaden downe, but not troaden out; hauing her secret both meanes to support, and [Page] seasons to reuiue her. For although the lawfull suc­cessor did warily strike saile to the tempest, because neither the time running, nor the opportunitie pre­sent (which are the guiders of actions) did consent as then to enter into enterprise. Yet so soone as one heare of occasion was offered, his progenie did set vp a most doubtfull warre, wherein thirteene bat­tailes were executed by English-men only, and a­boue fourescore Princes of the royall blood slaine.

Loe now the smiling successe of these vsurpati­ons; loe what a deare purchase of repentance they did cause! Were it not that passion doth blind men, not only in desire but in hope, they might suffice to make vs aduised, to keepe rather the knowne & bea­ten way with safetie, then vpon euery giddie and brainlesse warrant to engulphe our selues in those passages, wherein so many haue perished before vs. It belongeth to wise men to auoide mischies; and it is the reward of fooles to lament them.

Goe too then, conclude if you please that the people are not bound to admit him to the Crowne, who is the next successor by propinquitie of blood; but rather to weigh, whether it is like that hee will performe his charge, or no. Conclude this (I say) to be your opinion; and that it seemeth to you to be conforme to all reason, lawe, religion, pietie, wise­dome and policie, and to the custome of all Com­mon wealthes in the world: and I wil assuredly con­clude against you, that you prate without either warrant or weight.

IN this passage you handle what cause is sufficient, either to keepe in, or to cast the next in blood out of state. In which question you determine, that God doth allowe for a iust and sufficient cause, the will & iudgement of the people. Your reason is, for that they are the iudge of the thing it selfe, and therefore they are the iudge also of the cause. Your antecedent you proue; First, for that it is in their owne affaire; se­condly, for that it is in a matter that hath his whole beginning, continuance and substance from them a­lone. Your cōsequence you proue by a whole lump of lawe, in alleaging the entire bodie of the ciuil and Canon lawe, assisted also with great reason.

Diogenes said of a certain Tumbler, that he neuer sawe man take more paines to breake his necke. In like sort we may say of you; It is hard to finde a man that hath more busied his wittes, to ouerthrow the opiniō of his wisedome. For the first proofe of your antecedēt, is not only of no force for you, but strong against you; because no man is a competent iudge in his owne cause; no man can bee both partie and iudge: whereto I wil adde, that no inferiour hath iu­risdiction ouer the superiour, much lesse the subiect against the Soueraigne.

[Page]Your second proofe, that all the power of a King hath dependency vpon the people, I haue sufficient­ly encountred before Ca. 1.. And if your consequence were true, that whosoeuer is iudge of a thing, is iudg also without controwlment of the cause; if this were as agreeable to all lawes as you make countenance, then were all iudgements arbitrarie; then could no appeale be enterposed, for giuing sentence without iust cause; then were it false which Panormitane wri­teth In e per tuas. Qui fil. sunt legit., that a false cause expressed in a sentence ma­keth it voide.

What shall I say? what doe you thinke? doe you think that these fat drops of a greasie brain, can bring the tenure of a crown to the wil of the people? what are you who endeuour thus boldly to abuse both our iudgement & conscience? Are you religious? are you of ciuil either nature or education, who vn­der the name of Ciuilian do open the way to all ma­ner of deceits, periuries, tumults & treasons? What are you? For you shewe your selfe more prophane then Infidels; more barbarous then Caniballs, Tar­tarians, Moores & Mammelucks; who though they beare themselues in nothing more then hatred and cōtempt, yet do they both loue & honor their kings. I see what you are, the very true follower of the A­nabaptists in Garmanie, who openly professed, that they must ruinate the state of kings. And who can as­sure vs (for your corrupt dealing make all suspitions credible) that you doe not also follow them both in desire and hope, to imbrace the Monarchy of the whole world. The difference betweene you is this: they pretended reuelation for their warrant: you worke by deceitfull shewe of reason, by falsly either [Page] alleaging, or wresting, or corrupting both humane and diuine authoritie.

In what miserable condition should Princes liue, if their slate depended vpon the pleasure of the peo­ple, in whom company taketh away shame, and eue­ry man may laie the fault on his fellow? How could they commaund? who would obey? what could they safely either doe or omit? Who knowes a peo­ple, that knoweth not, that suddain opinion maketh them hope, which if it be not presently answered, they fall into hate? choosing and refusing, erecting and ouerthrowing, as euery winde of passion doth puffe. What staiednesse in their will or desire? which hauing so many circles of imagination, can neuer be enclosed in one point.

And whereas you write, that God alwaies appro­ueth the will and iudgement of the people, as being properly the iudge of the whole businesse; and that euery particular man must simply submit himselfe therevnto, without further inquisition, although at diuers times they determine contraries, (as they did betweene the houses of Lancaster and Yorke) be­cause we must presume that they were ledde by dif­ferent respects. You seeme not obscurely to erect thereby another priuiledged power vppon earth; which cannot erre, which doth not deceiue.

But it may be some honest minded man will say, that howsoeuer you write, your meaning was o­therwise; you write also afterward, that in two cases euery priuate man is bounde to resist the iudgement of the whole people, to the vttermost extent of his abilitie. Well then, let vs take you for a man, whose sayings disagree, both from your meaning, and be­tweene [Page] themselues: let vs consider what are your two exceptions.

The first is when the matter is carried, not by way of orderly iudgement, but by particular faction of priuate men, who will make offer to determine the cause, without authoritie of the Realme committed vnto them. But this exception is so large, that it de­uoureth the whole rule: for in actions of this qua­litie, the originall is alwaies by faction▪ the accom­plishment by force, or at least by feare, howsoeuer they are sometimes countenanced with authoritie of the state. So Sylla, hauing brought his legions within the walles of Rome, obteined the lawe Va­leria to be published, whereby he was created Dic­tator for 24. yeares: by meanes of which force, Ci­cero affirmeth Lib. de le­gibus. that it was no lawe. Likewise Law­rence Medices, hauing an armie within Florence, caused, or rather constrained the Citizens to elect him Duke. When Henry the fourth was chosen king, ho held fortie thousand men in Armes. And this is most euident by your owne example, of foure con­trary actes of Parliament which at diuers times were made, during the contention betweene the fami­lies of Lancastar and Yorke, not vpon different rea­sons, as with little reason you affirme, but vpon dif­ferent successe of either side.

In matters of this moment, the orderly course of proceeding is onely by Parliament. The Par­liament must bee summoned by the Kings vvrit, and no act thereof hath life, But by expresse con­sent of the King. If this forme had alvvayes beene obserued, neyther our Kinges should haue beene deposed, nor the next successours excluded, [Page] nor the title of the crowne entangled, to the inesti­mable both weakning & waste of all the Realme.

Your second exceptiō is, when such a man is pre­ferred to the crowne, by whō God is manifestly of­fended, & the realme preiudiced or endangered: in which case (you say) euery man, with a free and vn­trowled conscience, may resist what he can.

It was euen here I looked for you. Your broyling spirits do nothing else but fling firebrands, & heape on wood, to set kingdomes in combustiō. What re­bellion, what reuolt hath euer bin made, but vnder some of these pretenses? what Princes actions, either by malicious or ignorant interpretation, may not easily be drawen to one of these heades? you are a nursery of war in the common-wealth: a Seminary of schisme & diuisiō in the church: In sum, all your actions, all your thoughts are barbarous & bloody.

You write much of right & iustice, but you mea­sure the right & iustice of a cause, by the aduantage of your owne affaires. You speak as hauing a tender touch of the glorie of God; but you stretch out your throate with high wordes of contradiction against him. You make shew of care to pre [...]erue the state, but you are like the Iuy, which [...]eemeth outwardly both to imbrace and adorne the wall, whereinto inward­ly it doth both eate & vndermine. For what meanes either more readie or forceable to ouerthrow a state, then faction and intestine quarels? and what other milke doe you yeelde? what are your opinions? what your exhortations? but either to set, or to holde vp sedition and bloodshead? Saint Paule teacheth vs not to resist higher powers Rom. 13., although both cruel and prophane; you teach vs to resist them [Page] what we can: the Apostle is followed of al the aunti­ent Fathers of the church; you are followed of those only who follow the Anabaptists. For my part, I had rather erre with the Apostle in this opposition, then holde truth with you. But I will speake more mode­rately in a subiect of such nature; I wil not say thē that I had rather erre, but that I shall lesse feare to erre in not resisting with y ^e Apostle, thē in resisting with you. New councels are alwaies more plausible then safe.

After you haue plaide the Suffenus with your selfe, in setting the garland vpon your owne head, and making your imaginarie audience to applaude your opinion, as worshipfully wise, you proceede to declare what ought chiefly [...]o be regarded, in furthe­ring or hindering any Prince towards the Crowne. Three points (you say) are to bee required in euerie Prince, religion, chiualrie and iustice; and putting a­side the two last, as both handled by others, and of least importance, you assume onely to treate of reli­gion; wherein, eyther errour or want doth bring inestimable damage to any state.

You drawe along discourse, that the highest end of euery Common-wealth, is the seruice & worship of God; and consequently, that the care of religion is the principall charge which pertaineth to a King. And therfore you conclude, that whatsoeuer prince doth not assist his subiects to attaine this ende, omit­teth the chief part of his charge, & committeth high treason against his Lord, and is not fit to holde that dignitie, though he performe the other two partes neuer so well. And that no cause can to iustly cleare the conscience, whether of the people, or of particu­lar men, in resisting the entrance of any Prince, as if [Page] they iudge him faultie in religion.

This is neither nothing, nor all which you say. In electiue states, the people ought not to admit any man for King, who is eyther colde or corrupt in re­ligion; but if they haue admitted such a one with so­ueraigne authoritie, they haue no power at pleasure to remoue him. In successiue kingdomes wherein the people haue no right of election, it is not lawfull for priuate men vpon this cause to offer to impeach, either the entrāce or cōtinuance of that king, which the lawes of the State do present vnto them: not on­ly because it is forbidden of God (for that is the least part of your regard) but because disorderly distur­bance of a setled forme in gouernment, traineth after it more both impieties and dangers, then hath euer ensued the imperfections of a king.

I will come more close to the point in controuer­sie, and dispell these foggie reasons which stand be­tweene your eye and the truth. There are two prin­cipall parts of the lawe of God; the one morall or na­tural, which containeth three points; sobrietie in our selues, iustice towards others, and generally also re­uerence and pietie towards God: the other is super­naturall; which containeth the true faith of the my­steries of our saluation, and the speciall kind of wor­ship that God doth require. The first, God hath deli­uered by the ministrie of nature to all men; the se­cond he doth partly reueale, & partly enspire to whō he please: and therefore although most nations haue in some sort obserued the one, yet haue they not on­ly erred, but failed in the other.

During the time of the lawe, this peculiar worship of God was appropriate only to the people of Israel, [Page] in a corner kingdome of the world: the flourishing Empires of the Assirians, Medes, Persians, Aegyptiās, Graecians, Syrians and Romans, eyther knew it not, or held it in contempt. The Israelites were almost al­waies in subiection vnder these both Heathen & ty­rannicall gouernments; & yet God by his Prophets enioyned them obedience; affirming, that the hearts of kings were in his hands; & that they were, the offi­cers of his iustice, the executioners of his decrees.

In the time of grace, the true mysteries both of worship and beliefe, were imparted also to other na­tions; but the ordinarie meanes to propagate the same, was neither by policie, nor by power. When S. Peter offered prouident counsell (as hee thought) vnto Christ, aduising him to haue care of himselfe, and not to go to Hierusalem, where the Iewes sought to put him to death, Christ did sharply reproue him for it Math. 16.25.: when he did drawe his sword, and therwith also drew bloud in defence of Christ, hee heard this sentence; Math. 26.52. They that take the sworde shall perish with the sworde. Christ armed his Apostles onely with firie tongues Act. 2.3.; by force whereof they maintained the fielde, against all the stratagems and strength in the world. And when Princes did, not onely reiect but persecute their doctrine; they taught their subiects obedience vnto them Rom. 13. 1. Pet. 2., they did both encounter and ouercome them, not by resisting, but by persi­sting and enduring.

This course seemeth straunge to the discourse of of reason, to plant religion vnder the obedience of kings, not only carelesse therof, but cruell against it: but when we consider that the Iewes did common­ly forsake God in prosperitie, and seeke him in [Page] distresse; that the Church of Christ was more pure, more zealous, more entire, I might also say more po­pulous, when shee trauelled with the storme in her face, then when the winde was eyther prosperous or calme; that as S. Augustine saith Contra Pe­tihanum., Want or weakenesse of faith is vsually chastised with the scourges of tribulatiōs; We may learne thereby no further to examine, but to admire and embrace the vnsearchable wisedome and will of God.

Seeing therefore that this is appointed the ordi­narie meanes, both to establish and encrease religiō, may we aduenture to exchange it with humane de­uices? Is it the seruants dutie eyther to contradict or dispute the maisters commaundement? is there any more readie way to proue an heretike, then in being a curious questionist with God? is hee bounde to yeelde to any man a reason of his will? It is more then presumption, it is plaine rebelliō to oppose our reason against his order, against his decree.

It standeth also vpon common rules: That which is contrary to the nature of a thing doth not helpe to streng­then, but to destroy it: It is foolish to adde externall stay, to that which is sufficient to support it selfe: It is sencelesse to attempt that by force, which no force is able to effect: That which hath a proper rule, must not be directed by any other. And this was both the profession and practise of the auntient Fathers of the Church, as I haue de­clared before Ca. [...].; wherto I wil here adde that which S. Ambrose saith Epist. 54.: Let euery man beare it patiently, if it be not extorted frō the Emperor, which he would be loath the Emperor should extort frō him. And least they might be interpreted not to mean obedience, as wel to succes­sion as to present power, they alledge that which the [Page] captiue Iewes of Babilon did wright, to the tributarie Iewes which were at Ierusalem Hierem. 29. Baruch. 1; to pray for the life not onely of Nabuchodonosor, the King of Babilon, but also of Baltasar his sonne, the next successor to his estate.

But in latter times, Innocentius hath taught, and is also seconded by Castrensis in rep. l. 5 de iust., that loue is a iust cause to moue armes for matters of religion; vnder which pretence, di­uers men haue pursued their owne priuate purposes & end [...]s. Guicciardine wrighteth lib. 12., that Firdinand who was called the catholicke, did couer al his couetous and ambitious desires, with the honest and holy veile of re­ligion: the like dooth Iouius reporte lib. 30. of Charles the fifth Emperour. Paulus Aemilius Paul. Aem. 6.7.8 wrighteth thus of all: euery man professeth his war to be holy; euery man termeth his enemies impious, sanctity & piety is in euery mans mouth, but in aduise and in action nothing lesse. The cōtention is for world­ly right, take away that, and you shall finde no cause of war. Now they pretend piety to euery mischiefe: the name of holy warrefare, (most miserable) is applied vnto armes.

Hereupon such cru [...]ll calamities haue ensued in most partes of Europe, & [...]specially in Germanie and France, with so little furtherance to that cause, for whose sup­portance force was offred, that all the chiefe wrighters of our age are now reduced to the former opinion; affir­ming with Arnobius Adu. ge. 3.4. that religion is of power sufficient for it selfe: with Tertulian also Apolo. Hactantius Inst. 20.21., Cassiodo­rus 2. Var. 27. et. lib. 10 epi. 26. Iosephus de Vi. su., S. Barnard cant. ser., and others, that it must be perswaded and not enforced. They of your society, as they tooke their originall from a souldier, so they are the onely Atheologians whose heades entertaine no other obiect but the tumult of realmes; whose doctrine is no­thing but confusion and bloodshed; whose perswa­sions [Page] were neuer followed, but they haue made way for all miseries and mischiefes to range in, to come for­ward, to thriue, to preuaile. You haue alwayes bin like a winter sunne, strong enough to raise vapours, but vn­able to dispell them. For most cowardly companions may set vp striefe; but it is maintained with the hazard, and ended with the ruine, alwayes of the worthiest, and sometimes of all.

The summe is this. So long as we expresse pure pie­tie, both in our doctrine and in our doings; all will goe well; but when we make a mixture of deuine and hu­mane both wisedome and power; when we preach po­licie: when we make a common trade of treason; when we put no difference betweene conscience and con­ceite; we must needes ouerthrow, either religion or our selues.

Now I will answere the reasons of your assertion. First you say, that if Princes doe not assist their subiects in the honour and seruice of God in this life, God should drawe no other fruite or commodity from hu­mane societies, then of an assembly of brutish creatures. But this reason is not onely weake, as it may appeare by that which hath beene saide, but also brutish, and (which is worse) prophane. For what fruite, what commoditie doeth God drawe from societies of men? is not his glory perfect in it selfe? can we adde any thing to the excellencie thereof? hath he any neede of our broken worship? God is an absolute beeing, both comprehending, and exceeding all perfections: an in­finite being, and therefore his sufficiencies neither can be encreased, neither doe depend vpon any, but onely of himselfe. He was from eternity without any world, [Page] [...]nd a thousand worldes more cannot any deale en­crease his felicity and glory: he did create the world, not to perticipate any thing thereof, but to communi­cate from himselfe vnto it. Heereupon Iob saith 22.5.. What profit is it to God if thou be iust? What aduantage is it to him if thy wayes bee cleane? Surelie we must be bet­ter enformed of the soundnesse of your iudgement, before we dare depend vppon the authority of your worde.

You put vs in minde that you compared an heire apparant to a spouse, betroathed onely and not maried to the common wealth. I remember it well; but I did not take you for such a widower of wit, that you could thinke it worthy to be repeated. And yet that which herevpon you deduce out of S. Paul maketh altogether against you. S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 7., that if a brother hath an in­fidell to wife, if the consent to abide with him, he may not put her away: and likewise if a woman hath an in­fidell husband: but if the infidell doeth depart, then the Christian is free. Now if you will needes make a marriage betweene a King and his subiects, you might heereupon conclude, that if an infidell King will houlde his state, the people may not dispossesse him.

And whereas you affirme, that all they who dif­fer in any point of religion, and stand wilfully in the same, are infidelles the one to the other, you shew both a violence and weakenesse of minde. For obstinate error in certaine articles of [...]aith, and not in the whole state and substance thereof, doth make an hereticke, but not an Infidell. And although the Canon lawe dooth in some case dissolue mariage betweene a Christian [Page] and an Infidell c. iudaei. 28. q. 1. c. quanto. de diuor.; yet doth it not permit the like be­tweene a true Christian and an heretick d. c. quāto c. gaudemus de diuort.. And Panor­mitane Inc. ex parte. 2. de conuer. coniug. in his doubting manner denyeth, that the Church hath power to authorize diuorce in case of he­resie. So that allowing your compa [...]ison for good, yet in case of infidelitie, S. Paule; in case of heresie, the Cannon lawe is altogether against you.

You adde, that albeit the religion which a man pro­fesseth be neuer so true, yet whosoeuer hath a contrary perswasion thereof, he shall sinne damnably in the sight of God, to preferre that man to a charge, wherein he may drawe others to his opinion. But I will omit this streine, and yet rather as impertinent then true. For there are few nations in the world, wherein the people haue right to prefer any man to be king: & that which you alleage out of S. Paule Rom. 14. 1. Cor. 8. for your proofe, is very different from the case which you do forme. The Apo­stle speaketh when an action is of it selfe indifferent, but a weake conscience iudgeth it euill; being also euill by circumstance, in offending others: you speake where an action is good in it selfe, but an erronious conscience iudgeth it euill. I allowe, that a good action contrarie to conscience is vnprofitable; but that it is alwayes a damnable sinne I dare not affirme. I dare not affirme that the Romane armie did damnably sinne, in defer­ing the Empire to Iouinian; who excusing himselfe, (as Zona [...]as wrighteth) because being a Christian he could not command a Pagane armie, they did not­withstanding confirme him Emperour, by which means they did afterward embrace the Christian faith. The like doth Orosius report, that Valentinian, being dis­charged by Iulian from being Tribune, because he was a Christian, by consent of the Souldiers was created [Page] Augustus. I rather take it to be a damnable sinne, which Zonaras to. 3. wrighteth of the Bulgarians, in taking armes against their King, because he was conuerted to Chri­stian religion; albeit they did according to their con­science. It were a deflowring of time to diue into the depth of this question; because it appe [...]teineth to e­lectiue states, and not vnto vs. But where you wright, without eyther authoritie or proofe, that to assist, or not to resist the aduancement or gouernment of any king, whom we iudge faultie in religion, is a most damnable sinne, of what side soeuer the truth be; you breath out most filthy and vnsauorie smoake; you lift vp your voice into high blasts of blasphemie, against the most high.

God hath taught by the Apostle S. Paule Rom. 15., that who­soeuer resist the higher powers (which at that time were Infidels) receiue vnto themselues damnation; you teach, that whosoeuer doth not in the like case resist, doth damnably offend. Were not the spirit of diuision, otherwise called the deuill seated in your soule, you would not thus openly oppose the setlings of your rot­ten braine, against the expresse and direct sentence of God. What? is it a damnable sinne to doe euery man right? is it damnable to giue Caesar that which is his due Math. 22 17. Mar. 12.17. Luc. 20.25.? to giue tribute, honor, feare, to whom they ap­pertaine Rom. 13 7? The Apostle saith, that Christians by resist­ing the power of Infidell rulers, do acquire vnto them­selues damnation Rom. 13.2: and shall wee yeelde credit vnto you, that Turkes, Moores, Infidels, should damnablye sinne, eyther in admitting or enduring the authoritie of a Christian Prince? How vilie doe you value the iudgements of men? at how lowe rate doe you prize both your conscience and credit? I could rise into riot [Page] of wordes vpon you, were it not that I respect what is seemlye, rather for mee to speake then for you to heare.

Certainely, if we had receiued no such commaun­dement from God, the regarde of the quiet of humane societies is sufficient to ouer-whelme your hereticall assertion: for seeing there are many different professi­ons of religion, not onely in the world, but almost in euery nation of the world: seeing also (as Philo saith De legat.) euery man, eyther by vse or instruction iudgeth his owne religion best: what suretie could any Prince, what safetie could any people enioy, if your firie opini­on should take place? what assurance can there be of life or of state, where the sworde beareth swaye vpon such occasions, & that guided by hands both tumultu­ous and fierce. And seeing among many religions there can be but one truth, if all men should be obstinate­lie bent against the gouernment of any, who in their iudgement is faultie in religion; what likelyhood can we eyther conceiue or coniecture, but that many er­rours would soone preuaile against the onely trueth. And therefore it is farre more moderate and safe, to vse the ordinarie meanes both of maintaining and pro­pagating the trueth, and to commit the successe there­of vnto God; and (as Iosephus aduiseth) not to offer eyther contumelie or violence against any religion, least we prouoake thereby the professors thereof to doe the like against our.

Your last reason is drawne from policie and consi­deration of state; because a King will neyther trust nor fauour, much lesse aduance him, that is not of the same religion with himselfe: but to the contra­rie, hee shall bee subiect to all molestations, iniuries [Page] and other auersions, which are incident to those who are not currant with the present course of af­faires.

Oh sirre; this is the Helene for which you con­tend; you concurre in opinion with those Athenians of whome Alexander demanded deuine honours; not so obstinately to defend heauen, as to loose the bene­fit of the earth. This is the marke whereat you aime, this is the Compasse whereby you sayle; as diuers flowers doe open and cloase, according to the moti­on of the same; so according to the variation here­of, you extend or restraine your plyant conscience as you please.

But the Apostle teacheth vs to be obedient to high­er powers, for conscience sake Rom. 13.5, and not for anye priuate respect.

Besides, all Princes are not of that disposition whereof you speake. Suida wrighteth of one, who changing religion to please his King, was therefore adiudged to loose his head; one being appointed to crye at the time of his execution; Hee that keepeth not faith with God, what sound conscience can hee beare towards men? The Protestants in France are not altogether cast eyther out of fauoure or out of charge: and ma­nie Romane Catholickes in England, doe enioye their full part, of all the plentie and pleasures that the realme can affoord.

Lastly, what haue you to doe with reasons of state? This is the Eagles feather which consumeth your deuo­tiō. Your office is to meditate, to pray, to instruct mē in pure deuotion, to settle their soules in piety & in peace. But do you containe yourselues within these limmits? nothing lesse. You take vpon you the pollicie of state; [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] yoù [...]end & deface the reputation of Kings; you make your selues both iudges & moderators of all their acti­ons, allowing them to flie no further then you giue them wings. You dispose not onely their affaires, but their crownes at your pleasure; you hunt them, not to couert, but to death. You contriue wa [...]s to compasse your de­signes; you traine vp your followers in the high miste­ry of treason; you cast into euery realme the apple of striefe: your doctrine is to no other vse but as drummes, Fifes, and trumpets to incense fury.

To these endes, you wrest scriptures, you corrupt histories, you counterfeit reasōs, you corrupt all truth (pardon my plainenes I pray you, I haue not atteined to your dexterity in disguising matters with smooth termes) you are obstinate to hazard rather all dangers, then to be cut of from one point of your purpose. You acknowledge no religion but your will, no law but your power: all lies, treacheries and fraudes do change their nature, and become both lawfull and laudable actions when they beare for the aduantage of your affaires.

But this is directed to deuotion, (you will say) and as you terme it, ordine ad deum, for a holy and religious end. Away then with your deuotion, and so we shall be rid of your dangerous deceit. Away I say with your deuo­tion; or else we will conclude of you as Liuie did of Anniball: nihil veri, nihil sancti, nullus de­ûm metus nullum iusiuradum, nulla religio.