In his Speech to the Parliament 1603, he expresseth himself thus:

I Do acknowledge that the special and greatest point of difference that is betwixt a rightful King and an usurping Tyrant, is in this: That whereas the proud and ambitious Tyrant doth think his King­dom and People, are only ordained for satisfaction of his Desires, and unreasonable Appetites; The righteous and just King doth by the contrary acknowledge himself to be ordained for the procuring of the Wealth and Prosperity of his People; and that his great and principal worldly Felicity, must consist in their Prosperity. If you be Rich, I cannot be Poor; if you be Happy, I cannot but be Fortunate; and I protest your Welfare shall ever be my greatest Care and Contentment. And that I am a Servant, it is most true, that as I am Head and Go­vernour of all the People in my Dominion, who are my natural Subjects, considering them in distinct Ranks, so if we will take in the People as one Body, then as the Head is ordained for the Body, and not the Body for the Head; so must a righteous King know himself to be Ordained for his People, and not his People for him.

Wherefore, I will never be ashamed to confess it my principal Honour to be the great Servant of the Common-wealth; and ever think the Prosperity thereof to be my greatest Felicity, &c.

In his Speech to the Parliament, March 21. 1609. he expresseth himself thus:

IN these our times we are to distinguish betwixt the State of Kings in the first Original, and between the State of setled Kings and Mo­narchs, [Page 2] that do at this time Govern in Civil Kingdoms: For even as God during the time of the Old Testament, spake by Oracles, and wrought by Miracles, yet how soon it pleased him to settle a Church (which was Bought and Redeemed by the Blood of his only Son Christ) then was there a Cessation of both: He ever after governing his Church and Peo­ple within the limits of his revealed Will. So in the first Original of Kings, whereof some had their beginning by Conquest, and some by E­lection of the People, their Wills at that time served for a Law; yet how soon Kingdoms began to be settled in Civility and Policy, then did Kings set down their Minds by Laws, which are properly made by the King only; but at the Rogation of the People, the King's Grant being obtain­ed thereunto; and so the King came to be Lex loquens, a speaking Law, after a sort binding himself by a double Oath to the observation of the Fundamental Laws of his Kingdom: Tacitly, as by being a King, and so bound to protect as well the People, as the Laws of his Kingdom; and expresly by his Oath at his Coronation: So as every just King in a set­tled Kingdom is bound to observe that Paction made to his People by his Laws, in framing his Government agreeable thereunto, according to that Paction which God made with Noah after the Deluge: Hereafter, Seed-time and Harvest, Summer and Winter, Cold and Heat, Day and Night shall not cease, so long as the Earth remains. And therefore a King Governing in a settled Kingdom, leaves to be a King, and degenerates into a Tyrant, as soon as he leaves off to Rule according to his Laws. In which Case the King's Conscience may speak unto him as the poor Wi­dow said to Philip of Macedon, Either Govern according to your Law, aut ne Rex sis, or cease to be King; and though no Christian Man ought to allow any Rebellion of People against their Prince, yet doth God never leave Kings unpunished when they transgress these Limits. For in that same Psalm where God saith to Kings, Vos dii estis, Ye are Gods: He immediately thereafter concludes, But ye shall die like Men: The high­er we are placed, the greater shall our fall be; Ut casus sic dolor, as the fall, so the grief, the taller the Trees be, the more in danger of the Wind; and the Tempest beats sorest upon the highest Mountains. Therefore all Kings that are no Tyrants, or Perju­red, will be glad to bound themselves within the limits of their Laws, and they that perswade them the con­trary, are Vipers and Pests both against them and the Common-wealth. For it is a great difference betwixt a King's Government in a settled Estate, and what Kings in their Origi­nal Power might do in Individio vago: As for my part, I thank [Page 3] God I have ever given good proof that I never had Intention to the con­trary: And I am sure to go to my Grave with that Reputation and Com­fort, that never King was in all his time more careful to have his Laws duly observed, and himself to Govern thereafter, than I.

That Just Kings will ever be willing to declare what they will do, if they will not incur the Curse of God. I will not be content that my Power be disputed upon, but I shall ever be willing to make the reason ap­pear of all my Doings, and rule my Actions according to the Laws.

And afterwards speaking of the Common Law of England, which some conceived he contemned, saith to this purpose: That as a King he had least cause of any Man to dislike the Common Law; for no Law can be more favourable or advantageous for a King; and extendeth further his Prerogative, than it doth; and for a King of England to despise the Common Law, is to neglect his own Crown. It is true, that no King­dom in the World, but every one of them hath their own Municipal Laws agreeable to their Customs, as this Kingdom hath the Common Law. Nay, I am so far from disallowing the Common Law, as I protest that if it were in my hand to chuse a new Law for this Kingdom, I would not only prefer it before any other National Law, but even before the very Judicial Law of Moses, for conveniency to this Kingdom at this time, though in another respect I must say, both our Law, and all Laws else are very inferiour to that Judicial Law of God; for no Book nor Law is perfect nor free from corruption, except only the Book and Law of God. And therefore I could wish that some Corruptions might be purged and cleared in the Common Law, but always by the Advice of Parliaments; for the King with his Parliament here are absolute, in making or form­ing any sort of Laws.

First, I could wish that it were written in our Vulgar Language [...] for now it is an old mixt corrupt Language, only understood by Lawyers: Whereas every Subject ought to understand the Law under which he lives: since it is our Plea against the Papists, that the Language in God's Ser­vice ought not to be in an unknown Tongue, according to the Rule in the Law of Moses, that the Law should be written in the Fringes of the Priest's Garment, and should be publickly read in the ears of all the Peo­ple; so methinks ought our Law to be made as plain as can be to the People, that the excuse of Ignorance may be taken from them for conform­ing themselves thereunto.

Next, our Common Law hath not a setled Text, being chiefly ground­ed upon old Customs, which you call Responsa Prudentum—I could wish that some more certain were set down in this case by Parliament: for since the Reports themselves are not always so binding, but that di­vers [Page 4] times Judges do disclaim them, and recede from the Judgment of their Predecessors: It were good that upon a mature deliberation, the Exposition of the Law were set down by Act of Parliament, and such Reports therein confirmed, as were thought fit to serve for Law in all times hereafter, and so the People should not depend upon the bare Opi­nions of Judges, and uncertain Reports.

And lastly, there be in the Law contrary Reports and Precedents; and this corruption doth likewise concern the Statutes and Acts of Parlia­ment, in respect there are divers cross and cuffing Statutes, and some so penn'd as they may be taken in divers, yea contrary sences. And therefore would I wish both those Statutes and Reports, as well in the Parlia­ment, as Common Law, to be once materially reviewed and reconciled.

And that not only Contrarieties should be scraped out of our Books, but that even such Penal Statutes as were made but for the use of the time (for breach whereof no Man can be free) which do not now agree with the condition of this our time, might likewise be left out of our Books, which under a tyrannous and avaritious King could not be endured.

And this Reformation might, we think, be made a worthy work, and well deserves a Parliament to be set of purpose for it, &c.

And as to the point of Grievances tells them, That there are two special Causes of the Peoples presenting Grievances to their King in time of Parliament.

First, For that the King cannot at other times be so well informed of all the Grievances of his People, as in time of Parliament, which is the Representative Body of the whole Realm. Secondly, The Parliament is the highest Court of Justice, and therefore the fittest place where divers natures of Grievances may have their proper Remedy, by the establish­ment of good and wholsome Laws: Wherein he addresses himself espe­cially to the lower House, who as representing the Body of the People, may as it were both Opportunè & Inopportune, in Season, and out of Season; I mean either in Parliament as a Body, or out of Parliament as private Men, present your Grievances unto me.—

I am not to find fault that you inform your selves of the particular Grievances of the People: Nay I must tell you, ye can neither be just nor faithful to me, or to your Countries that trust and employ you, if you do not; for true plaints proceed not from the persons em­ployed, but from the Body represented, which is the People. And it may very well be, that many Directions and Commissions justly given forth by me, may be abused in the execution thereof upon the People, and yet I never to receive Information, except it come by your means at such a time as this is.