Two Moneths have already past away, since with Astonishment I have beheld the most deplorable Condition of our Countrey; Into what a Chaos of Confusion and Distraction have we run our selves? And in what a Labrinth of Miseries and Perplex­ityes are we involved? 'Tis High Time now to make some serious Reflections on the state of our Affairs.

In the First place therefore, 'Twill be Necessary to Examine our selves, and to Consider,

1. For what Reasons, and to what End did we take up Arms?

2. Whether those Reasons be Substantial, and such as carry with them Weight enough to justifie the Act; And whether the proposed End can be obtained by such Methods?

3. If not, What will be the Event, and whether any way be left open to us for a peaceable and friendly Settlement?

Although there be some (not of the meanest Capacities) among us, who are of Opinion, that a few persons to gratifie their Malice, Ambi­tion or Revenge have been the plotters & contrivers of our unhappy Trou­bles, and the better to carry it on have made use of the deluded Coun­trey men, as the Monkey did the Cat's foot to fluck the Chesnut out of the fire; Yet I shall not lightly be over credulous in that matter, nor give Enter­tainment to such Suggestions; I shall onely therefore instance such things as Conversation & Report have brought to my Knowledge, or as I shall find obvious in the Declaration; the summe of which is,

Thus far have I traced the Declaration, and do not know that any one thing materiall is omitted, I shall now mention some other things which have occur'd.

[Page 4] 'Twas credibly reported,

With severall other things which I cannot recollect.

These are the principall Reasons alledged for our takeing up Arms: now the End can be no other than the Redresse of those evills complain­ed of.

The next thing then to be considered of is, Whether all or any of the Reasons aforesaid, are sufficient to justifie our Proceedings, and Whether the proposed End can be attained by such Measures.

First then, That there was an horrid popish Plott, is without doubt, and if England at that time had fallen under the Yoak of Roman Tyranny and Thraldome, tis as certainly true New-England must have under­gone the same Fate: but that this should be used or introduced as a Reason or Argument for Vacating our Charter is beyond my conception; for Fire and Sword were the designed instruments and ministers of their barbarous and hellish Contrivance: and if they had once prevailed, how weak a Rampart would our Charter have been against so cruell and pow­erfull an Enemy? Would a blood thirsty and conquering Papist have made Westminister-Hall the Arbiter? Certainly, No; we must have re­ceived our Law from the mouth of the Cannon, and our Hedge would have been broke downe with a great deal of ease. Is it reasonable to im­agine, that after they had waded through the blood of King and Nobles to their wished-for End in Old England, they would make use of Politicks in New-? And as preposterous and unreasonable to fancy, That for that end our Charter was called in question, especially when we consider that more than four Decads of years have allready past since the Crowne of England first thought it not fit for us to hold any longer, and several years after the popish Plot was discovered before the Scire facias issued out.

2. That the Charter was injuriously and illegally Condemned, without giveing us timely notice of it, or allowing us to Answer for our selves, might bear some weight with it, if true: but it will appeare quite o­ther wise, and that we had opportunity enough to have made defence on behalfe of our Charter, if we had so thought fit, for severall years before the proceedings to the Condemnation thereof. Our late Sove­raigne [Page 5] King Charles the Second, by His Letters signified to us the many Complaints that were made to him of our Encroachments, and ill Ad­ministration of the Government, and commanded that we should send o­ver Agents sufficiently Authorized, to Answer the same, which we at length so far complyed with, as to send Agents, who when they were called to hear and Answer the said Complaints, alwaies excused and a­voided the principall parts thereof pretending they were not sufficient­ly impowered for that purpose; and after, other Agents fully impow­ered to Answer, but not to submit or Conclude any thing: And when His Majesty was pleased to cause a Writt of Quo Warranto to be sued forth, against our Charter, and sent over with his Gracious Declaration, and Proposals of such Regulations to be made therein, as might be agree­able with His Majesties Service & the good & well-fare of his subject, here, and required an entire Submission from us therein; our Generall Court would not submit to, or comply therewith; onely a Letter was sent to the Right Honourable Sr. Lionell Jenkins, then Secretary of State, dated the 10. of December 1683, Subscribed by the Governour & Eight of the Assist­ants onely; wherein after the acknowledgement of their haveing had a Copy of the Quo Warranto and His Majesties Declaration, they say that the major part of the Magistrates have for severall Weeks declared their Opinion, and voted to lay themselves at His Majesties feet, by an hum­ble Submission and Resignation of themselves to His Majesties pleasure; not being willing to Contend with His Majestie in a Course of Law, but by the next Opportunity to dispatch their Agents fully impowered to make their submission according to His Majesties said Declaration, but by no means can at present obtain the Consent of the Deputyes whereby to make it an Act of the Corporation, and therefore have agreed with them to a power of Attourney-ship, to save a Default, in hopes that further time will prevail to dispatch their Agents accordingly, and shall earnestly endeavour to give the people a better Understanding before the next Ships saile from hence:

His Majesty by this finding that all the easie meanes He had used could not bring us to any Answer, for the Crimes and Misdemeanours laid to our Charge, nor produce any thing else but Baffles and Delayes, gave Order to His Attourney Generall to sue out a Writ or Scire facias out of the High-Court of Chancery, against our Governour and Company, which was accordingly done, directed to the Sheriffs of London &c. and made returnable in Easter Term, in the 36 yeare of His Majesties Reigne, wherein they were Required to make knowne to the said Governour & [Page 6] Company at London, that they may appeare in His Majesties High Court, of Chancery at Westminster, on the day of the Returne thereof, to shew cause wherefore the said Charter for the Reasons in the said Writt of Scire facias mentioned and contained, should not be made void, null, and cancelled, and the Liberties and priviledges thereby granted to the said Governour and Company be seized into the King's hands; upon which Writt the said Governour and Company not appearing, another Writt of Scire facias of the same Tenour issued forth, Returnable in Trinity Terme then next following, when the said Governour and Company appeared by their constituted Attourney and Councill, but refused to plead to the said Writt, onely moved for time to send hither, which not being agreeable with the Rules and Practice of the Court in such Cases, could not be allowed: But in favour to them a Rule was made, that unless they pleaded by the first day of the then next Michaelmas-Terme, Judgement should be entered by Default. And in that Terme for Default of pleading, Judgement was enterd on His Majesties Behalfe, and the said Charter adjudged to be void, Null, and Cancelled, and that the Liberties and Priviledges of the said Governour and Company be Seized into the Kings hands, which was accordingly done, by the Exem­plification of the said Judgement in the Reigne of King James the Second, and by His Majesties Commission to a President and Councill to take the Government of this Countrey: All which proceedings are most just and and Legall, according to the Rules and practice of the Law of England, and agreeable with many Precedents of the like nature, both Ancient and Moderne.

Besides: All Companies, Corporations, or Bodies politick, made or granted by Letters Patents or Charter from His Majesty, for any parts or places beyond the Seas, are by themselves or Agents, to be always ready to answer His Majesty in any of his Courts at Westminster, when He shall think fit to Order any Suite, or Writt to be sued and prosecuted against them; and are supposed to be Resident in or about London or West­minster for that purpose, as the East-India, Royall-Affrican, Bermudas, and Hudson-bay Companies are, who have their Trade, Factories, Colo­nies and Plantations abroad in Asia, Affrica, and America: and in the like state and Condition ought the Company and Corporation of the Massachusetts Bay in New-England to be, According to the Capacities given them by their Incorporation of Sueing and being sued, Pleading & being Impleaded; wherein if we have neglected our Duty, as well as ex­ceeded our Powers and Priviledges granted, and would not put our selves [Page 7] into a Condition to be heard when we ought and might, it is not His Majesty nor the Proceedings of His Courts that are to be blamed but ourselves.

3. That there was a Commission sent to the President, and the succes­sive one to Sr. Edmond Andross, are both true, but that they were ille­gall, is a position a little too confidently asserted by the Penman, who seems to be more a Clergy-man than a Lawyer; but because the well clearing up of this point will be of great Service to the subsequent Dis­course, 'twill not be amis, that it be throughly considered. I shall there­fore lay downe this as a certaine Maxime, both consonant to Reason & the Lawes of the Land: That Those Kingdomes, Principalities, and Colonies which are of the Dominion of the Crowne of England, and not of the Empire of the King of England, are subject to such Lawes, Ordinances and Forms of Government as the Crowne shall think fit to establish. That New-England and all the Plantations are subject to the Dominion of the Crowne of England, and not to the Empire of the King of England: Therefore, The Crowne of England may Rule and Governe them in such manner as it shall thinke most fit. For the proofe of which I shall instance Wales, which was once a Kingdome or Territory governed by its owne Lawes, but when it became of the Dominion of the Crowne of England, either by Submission or Conquest, it became subject also to such Lawes as King Edward the first (to whome they submitted) thought fit to impose: as may plainly appeare in the Preamble of the Statute of Rutland. Leges et Consuetudines, partium illarum hactenus usitatas, coram nobis et pro­ceribus Regni Nostri fecimus recitari, quibus diligenter auditis, et plenius in­tellectis, quasdam illarum de Consilio Procerum predictorum delevimus, quas­dam permissimus, et quasdam correximus, et etiam quasdam alias adjiciendas et faciendas decrevimus, et eas de caetero in terris Nostris in partibus [...] per­petua Firmitate, teneri et observari volumus, in forma subscripta. In English thus, ‘We have caused the Lawes and Customs of those parts hi­therto used, to be recited before Us and the Peers of Our Realme, which being diligently heard & more fully understood, some of them, by the Advice of Our Peers aforesaid, We have obliterated, some We have allowed, and some We have corrected, and have also decreed that some others shall be made and added to them; and We will, that for the future they be holden & observed in Our Lands in those parts with perpetual firmnesse, in manner herein after expressed.’

Then follow the Ordinances appointing Writts originall and judiciall in many things varying from those of England, and a particular [Page 8] manner of proceeding.

And againe in the Close of the said Statute, et ideo vobis mandamus quod permissa de catero in omnibus observaetis, it a tantum, quod quotiescun (que) et quandocun (que) et ubicun (que) Nobis placnerit, possimus praedicta Statuta et eorum paries singulas declarare, interpretari, addere sive diminuere pro Nostrae Libito voiuntatis prout securivati Nostrae et Terrae Nostrae viderimus expediri: ‘And therefore We Command you that from hence foreward you ob­serve the premises in all things so onely, that as often, whensoever and wheresoever We please, we may declare, interpret, add to and diminish from the said Statutes and every part of them according to Our will and pleasure, so as We shall see it expedient for the safety of Us and Our Land aforesaid.’

In the Next place I shall instance Ireland: That it is a Conquered Kingdome is not doubted, [ Co. Rep. fol. 18. a.] but admitted in Cal­vins Case, and by an Act of the 11th, 12th, and 13th, of King James, acknowledged in expresse words, Viz. Whereas in former times the Con­quest of this Realme by His Majesties most Royal Progenitors Kings of England, &c.

That by Virtue of the Conquest it became of the Dominion of the Crowne of England, and subject to such Lawes as the Conquerour thought fit to impose, untill afterwards by the Charters and Commands of H. the Second, King John, and H. the 3. they were entituled to the Lawes & Franchises of England; as by the said Charters, Reference being there­unto had, may more fully appeare. I shall onely instance two.

The first is out of the close Rolls of H. the 3. Wherein the King, after Thanks given to G. de. Mariscis Justice of Ireland, signifies, That Himself and all other his Leiges of Ireland should enjoy the Liberties which be had granted to his Leiges of England, and that he will grant & confirm the same unto them: [Claus. 1. H. 3. dorso 14] Which afterwards in the 12th yeare of his Reigne he did: as followeth, Rex dilecto et fideli suo Richardo de Burgo Justiciar'; suo Hibern', Salutem': Manddvimus vobis firmiter precipientes, quatenus certo die & loco faciatis venite coram vo­bis, Archiepiscopos, Episcopos, Abbates, Priores, Cometes, & Barones, Mi­lites & libere Tenentes, et Balivos singulorum Comitatuum, et coram eis pub­lice legi faciatis Chartam Domini Johannis Regis, Patris nostri, cui-Si­gillum suum appensum est, quam fieri fecit, et jurari a Magnatibus Hiberniae de Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae observandis in Hibernia. Et precipi­atis eis ex parte Nostra, quod Leges illas & Consuetudines in Charta proedict a content as, de ooetero firmiter teneant et observent. The King to His [Page 9] faithfull and beloved Richard 'de Burg Justice of Ireland Greeting; We have Commanded you, firmly injoining you, that on a certain day and place, you make to come before you, the Archbishops, Bishops, Ab­bots, Priors, Earles, Barons, Knights, & Free-Holders, and the Bay­lifs of every County, and before them you cause to be publickly read, the Charter of the Lord King John our Father to which His Seal is af­fixed, and which He caused to be made and sworne to by the Nobility of Ireland, concerning the Lawes and Customs of England, to be obser­ved in Ireland. And command them on Our behalfe, that for the fu­ture they firmly keep and observe those Laws and Customs conteined in the Charter aforesaid,

By all which it is evident that after the Conquest, and before the recited Charters, the Inhabitants there, altho' composed of many free-borne English Subjects who settled themselves among them, were neither govern'd by theire owne Laws, nor the Laws of England, but according to the good pleasure of the Conqueror: and if you will take the opinion of Sr. Edward Cooke in his Annotations on the Great Charter, he tells you plainly That at the makeing thereof it did not extend to Ireland, or any of the King's forreigne Dominions, but after the making of Poynings Law, which was in the 11th, yeare of H. and 7th (long after the Great Charter) it did Extend to Ireland.

I have onely one Instance more, and that is the Usage of forreigne Na­tions in theire Plantations and Settlements abroad.

The Government of the United Provinces & Denmarke are well knownn in Europe, and yet in all theire Plantations, their Governments are de­spoticall and absolute; all the power is in the hands of a Governour & Councill, and every thing is ordered and appointed by them; as is well knowne to those that are acquainted with Batavia, Surinam, Curasao, New-Yorke (when formerly in their hands) and the Island of St. Thomas.

By which it is it evident that. Those Kingdoms and Principalities which are of the Dominion of the Crowne of England, are subject to such Laws, Ordinances, and Methods of Government, as that Crowne shall think fit to establish.

The next thing then to be proved is, That New-England, and all the English Colonies are subject to the Dominion of the Crowne of England, as Wales and Ireland are and, not to the Empire of the King of England, as Scotland is,

'Tis a Fundamentall Point consented unto by all Christian Nations, that the First Discovery of a Countrey inhabited by infidells, gives a Right and Dominion of that Countrey to the Prince in whose Service and Em­ployment [Page 10] the Discoverers were sent. Thus the Spaniard claimes the West-Indies, the Portungals, Brasile, and thus the English those Northern parts of America; for Sebastian Cabott imployed by King H. the 7 th. was the first Discoverer of these parts, and in his name took possession, which his Royall Successours have held and continued ever since, there­fore they are of the Dominion of the Crowne of England, and as such they are accounted by that excellent Lawyer Sr. John Vaughan, in his Reports [ Vaugh. Rep. Craw versus Ramsey.] which being granted, the Conclusion must necessarily be good, and it will follow, That Englishmen permitted to be transported into the Plantations, (for thither without the Kings Licence we cannot come) can pretend to no other Liberties, Privi­ledes or Immunities there, than anciently the subjects of England who removed themselves into Ireland could have done: For 'tis from the Grace and Fa­vour of the Crowne alone that all these flow and are dispensed at the pleasure of him that sits on the Throne: which is plaine in the Great Charter it selfe; where after the Liberties therein granted by the King it concludes thus, tenendas & habendas de Nobis & Heredi­bus Nostris in perpetnum, To HAVE and to HOLD of Us and Our Heires for ever, which by the learned Sr. Edward Cooke is thus ex­plained: These Words (saith he) are not inserted to make a legall Tenure of the King, but to intimate that all Liberties at first were derived from the Crowne. [ Instit. Pag. 2. Fol. 4.] Barbadoes, Jamaica, the Lee­ward-Islands & Virginia have their Assemblies, but it is not sui Juris, 'tis from the Grace & Favour of the Crowne signified by Letters Patents under the broad Seale. But these Assemblies have not power to enforce any Act by them made above one year; the King haveing in all the Confessions granted them, reserved unto Himselfe, the Annulling or Continuance of what Laws they make, according to His pleasure.

New-England had a Charter, but no one will be so stupid to imagine that the King was bound to grant it us: Neither can we without im­peaching the prudent Conduct and discretion of our Fore-Fathers, so much as think, they would put themselves to so vast an expence, and unnecessary Trouble to Obtain that which as Englishmen, they thought themselves to have a sufficient right to before: We owe it onely to the Grace and Favour of our Soveraigne, and if we had made beter use of it to promote the Ends for which it was granted, the weight of those Afflictions under which we now groan would not have laine so heavy up­on us, at least we should have less deserved them.

Besides, The Parliament of England have never by any Act of theire [Page 11] favoured the Plantations, or declared or enlarged their Priviledges; but have all along plainly demonstrated that they were much differenced from England, and not to have those Priviledges and Liberties which England enjoyed; being in all Acts relateing to the Plantations, Re­strained and burthened beyond any in England, as appears by the several Acts, made for the Encreasing of Navigation and for Regulating and securing the Plantation Trade.

I think I have both by good Authority, Practice & Precedent, made it plaine, that the Plantations are of the Dominion of the Crown of Eng­land, and without any Regard to Magna Charta, may be Ruled and Governed, by such wayes and methods, as the Person who wears that Crowne, for the good and advancement of those Settlements, shall think most, proper and convenient. Therefore Neither the Commission to the President, nor that to Sr. Edmond Andros can be said to be illegall.

Since then such an one might lawfully be granted, we have great reason to commend the Moderation of the Gentleman, who was entrust­ed with it., and so returne thanks to Almighty God for placeing over us a person endued with that prudence & Integrity, that he was so far from exceeding his Commission, that he never put in execution the powers there­in granted him. Have there been any Taxes laid upon us, but such as were settled by Laws of our owne makeing, any part whereof might be retained & in force after the Condemnation of our Charter that the King thought fit. Who hath been Transferr'd out of this Territory? Or did we ever pay fewer Rates than we have done under him?

And whereas it is also Alledged in the Declaration, that there were Courses taken to damp and spoile the Trade, &c. the same is altogether Mistaken, (unlesse by that is meant the irregular Trade, used heretofore with Forreigners and Privateers, contrary to the Acts of Navigation &c the Laws of the Land) For the very considerable Advance of His Ma­jesties Revenue ariseing by Customs, doth sufficiently demonstrate that the lawfull Trade of this Territory, was very much enoreased under the Government of Sr. Edmond Andros.

4. 'Twill be but time lost to say any thing of the Red-Coats, for no man can be so void of Sence and Reason to think that so many Thousand men, which at this day inhabit this Colony, could be imposed upon by one hundred Red-Coats, and if any body hath been so vain as to threa­ten us with more, I look upon it an effect of Passion or Folly; for Ex­perience, which certainly is the most convinceing Argument in the world, tells us there is no such thing. [Page 12] and Haters of the People, I must confesse, I cannot easily comprehend, unless to inhabit fourteen or fifteen years within the Territory will make a man such. Is their any one Gentleman of the Councill, that hath ei­ther been displaced or put into that station by the Authority here? Which of our Judges are strangers? Were not Three of them brought up amongst us and of our owne Communion? and was not the other in the same Imployment is some part of this Territority at the time of the Annexation? From whome had the Secretary and Collector his Com­mission? certainly from no body here. Did the Alteration of the Go­vernment change our Treasurer? Is it not the same Sr. Edmond found here? Is he not a man of estate, good Credit and Reputation, and one of our owne Countrey men? Were not all Officers in the Govern­ment, as well Magisteriall as Ministeriall, naturall borne English-men, & Subjects to the Crowne of England? How then are Strangers & Haters of the people preferr'd, when there is not one that can reasonably and justly be so term'd in any place of Trust or Office throughout the Do­minion?

6. Who are mean't by abject persons from New-Yorke, wants an Ex­planation: for none of the Gentlemen that came from thence now in any Authority, but are well knowne to have liv'd there for a long time in esteem and Reputation enough to merit a better Epethite of all good and honest men; and I believe it will one day appear, that their faithfull Discharge of their Dutyes, their Constancy and Steadiness to the Church of England, and unshaken Loyalty & Fidelity to the Crowne was their greatest Crime.

I am not well acquainted what Fees were taken, but this I knowe, that a Committee of the Councill were appointed to make a Settlement of Fees, for all Officers throughout the Government, which was effect­ed, approved of, and sent to England, and if any one have exceeded those Limits they deserve to be called to Account: but it ought to be in a due Course of Law. For the personal Miscarriages of a ministeriall Officer, are no sufficient Warrant for an Insurrection; neither ought the Whole Government to be subverted because Tom, or Harry are ill men. The Authority can but provide good and wholsome Lawes, for the Punishment of evill Doers, and cause those Lawes to be put in Ex­ecution against Offenders; but if any one doth me a personall Wrong, for which I have a Remedy by Law, and I will not take it, I ought not to quarrell with the Government, for tis my own Fault, and I might have Redresse is I would. Personall Crimes must be censured personally: [Page 13] and a Government ought no more to be scandalized and aspersed, be­cause an Extortioner is in it, than because there is a Felon or a Traitor.

7. I need not tell you that the Statute Lawes of England are printed at large, and that many Abridgements of them are so Likewise, and easie enough to be procured, neither can it be but very well knowne that all the Acts of the Governour and Councill were solemnly publish'd with Sound of Trumpet as soon as made, and authentic Copies afterwards transmitted to the Clerks of each respective county throughout the Territory: why then it should be said, that It was impossible to know the Laws, I see no reason, unless by it is meant the Common Law, and if so, we may as well quarrell because we do not understand Euclide, or Aristo­tle; For the Knowledge of the Law cannot be attained without great Industry Study and Experience, and every capacity is not fitted for such an Undertaking. Ex quovis Ligno non fit Mercurius. If this was a Grievance, what a miserable Condition are we in now, that instead of not knowing the Law, there is no Law for us to know.

8. What rash or indiscreet Expressions may fall from any single per­son of the Councill, either in his private or politick Capacity, I will not undertake to justifie; all men are not endued with Qualifications a­like, every one in that, station ought to give his Opinion, as he him­selfe understands the matter; and if any one have unadvisedly uttered words so disagreeable, I know no body injured by it, neither can the Go­vernment be justly censured for it.

9. That the Priviledges of Magna Charta, & other liberties of English men were denied us, is a thing which can never be made appear, however admitting it, I have sufficiently discussed that point in the third Article.

10. By the persons said to be severely fined, for peaceble objecting a­gainst raising of Taxes, without an Assembly, I conjecture are meant the Ipswich men, who were so far from a peaceable objecting, that they assembled themselves in a riotous manner, and by an Instrument conceived in Writing, did associate and oblige themselves to stand by each other in opposition to the Laws of the Government, and by their Example in­fluenced their Neighbours to do the like. And this by the Law is e­steem'd an offence of that Nature, That it is next door to Rebellion, for which they were Indicted, Tryed, and Convicted, either by Verdict or their owne Confession.

11. I cannot justifie that Sheriffo who doth either pick or pack a Jury, tis both repugnant to the Law and his Oath, and he deserves no Favour that can be guilty of such a Crime, but let him first be known, & [Page 14] the thing proved, for I do not Remember any one that hath been Con­victed, nor so much as accused for such an Offence.

12. Judgement upon Deumrrers and Defaults are so practicable and warrantable by the Law, that nothing can excuse the Enumerating them amongst the Grieviances in the Declaration but the Penman's want of Knowledge in that Profession. Tis a Maxim, Volenti non fit Injuria, and when both Plaintiffe and Defendant do by a joint Consent submit to the Determination of the Court, or by their owne Negligence make Default; who hath the Wrong? Where is the injury? This hath been a Practice so frequently used in our former Government, that no body can be ignorant of it.

13. That any one hath been long imprisoned, without being charged with Crime or Misdemeanour, is an Allegation which I dare be bold to say can never be proved. I have heard an Hubeas Corpus was in one particular case denied, I will not enquire into the reasons of it, nor pretend to justifie it, although much may be said in that matter; Ad­mitting the Fact, 'twas but a personall injury, for which the Law gave an effectuall Remedy, and if the party grieved would not make use of such, must the Government be in fault? If we do but consider well how many persons are now under farr worse Circumstances, I am sure we can­not but blush when we read that part of the Declaration.

14. That Jury men were fined and imprisoned for Refuseing to lay their hands on the Book, I presume is a mistake, probably they may have been fined for their Contempt, and sent to Prison for not paying that fine, which by the Law may be justified; for every Court may fine any man for a Contempt in open Court, and they themselves are Judges of the Contempt.

Whether it be a forceing of Conscience [...] not, I shall leave to the Casuists, but I am very well satisfied it is not comprehended within the late Iudulgence.

Yet admit it were, the Judges are sworn to do their duties in their office according to the Lawes of the Land, Prescription is a good & sufficient Law, the form of Laying the hand on the Booke hath been the onely modus of Swearing, Time out of mind; Therefore the Laying the hand on the Booke in Swearing is a good Law, and the Judges cannot dispense with it salvo Sacramento, if they did, a Judgement in such a Case would be erroneous & reversable: and 'Tis dangerous to admit of Innovations,

The Common Law of New-England is brought in to warrant the Lifting up the hand; but I take that to be the Kara avis in terris, for I [Page 15] challenge the whole Territory to produce one Precedent of such a re­solved Case: but perhaps by it Prescription is intended, if it be, that will as illy serve the turn as the other; for the Colony hath not been long enough settled to claim any Advantage by that Right, or if it had, could it be admitted without apparent Violation of our Charter, being absolutely repugnant to the Lawes of England.

15. Fully to discuss the question concerning the Titles of our Lands, would be a Subject to copious for this present designe, Therefore I shall onely glance at it as I pass by, being Resolved, when time shall serve to declare my opinion more amply on that Subject; in the mean time let every considering man examine well our Charter, which is the very Basis of all our Rights, (unless we will set up a power above the Kings) and then let him tell me in whome the Fee Simple of that Tract of Land betwixt Charles River & Mirrimack remaines: if in the Grantees or their Heires, how do we derive our Titles from them? If in the Go­vernour and Company of the Massathusets Bay, we must enquire whether pursuant to the Directions and powers to them granted, it is by good & sufficient Conveyances in the Law derived unto us, if we find it so, we must not be disturbed with Fears and Jealousies, for nothing can hurt us: if not, we are infinitely obliged to those persons who have made us sensible of our Weakenesses, in a time when by His Majesties Letters Patents the Governour was impowered to supply all such defects, and not upon Terms either excessive or unreasonable, but upon such as were both easie & moderate, which will plainly appear to any man who will but give himself the trouble to peruse the Table of Fees, settled and allowed by the Councill. Yet still every man was at his own Liberty to take a Patent of Confirmation or to let it alone, which is Apparent enough by the many Petitions now lying in the Secretaries Office, which although his Excellency was alwayes ready (so far as in him lay) to Grant, yet the more necessitous Affairs of the Government, which both he and all about him ever preferr'd to theire private Advantage, took up so much of his time, that not above Twenty ever past the seale, and I am very well assured, that not one Example can be produced that the least compulsion was ever used in this Case to any man living within this Dominion.

16. That Writts of Intrusion were issued out, is doubtlesse true, and the Government would have justly merited a severe Censure, if all Waies should have been free & open for the Subject to attaine his Right, and none left for the King. We should think our selves highly injured to [Page 16] be refused a Capias or any other Common Writt, and I'm sure the other is as peremptory a one in the Kings Case, and had the Pen-man been ne­ver so little acquainted with the Natura Brevium, or the Register, he would have been ashamed to have stuffed up the Declaration with such matter which can be of no other service, than to amuse & deceive igno­rant people, have their been any Writts of this kind dureing Sr. Edmond's Administration, taken out against either poor or ignorant persons that had neither purses nor brains to defend themselves: hath it not been against such as both for their Estates and Capacities, are sufficiently known to be eminent? And the business of Deer-island was brought on for no o­ther Intent than that Right might be done to the King here, and that the party, if agrieved, might in a Regular way have brought it to the Councill board in England, for their determination: and I think if this matter were rightly understood, it would be of excellent Service to the Countrey, for such a Judgement would sufficiently instruct us what we have to trust to;

17. If the Governour did say, there was no such thing amongst us as a Towne, what can be inferred from thence? Tis not to be presumed but his discourse tended onely to a Body Corporate and politick, for we generally call that a Towne in America, where a number of people have seated themselves together: yet its very well known, tis so in name onely not in fact: I take that Body of People to be a Towne, properly so called, who by some Act of Law have been Incorporated, and in that sence there is no such thing as a Towne in the Massachusetts, neither was there a pow­er to make such before his Excellencies Arrivall. For One Corporation can­not make another. [the case of Suttons Hospital. Co. Rep.]

18. I am totally ignorant what is meant by Blank Patents, for tis the first time I ever heard of such a thing; neither indeed can such a thing be. For he that takes a Patent for his Land, doth it in such a Form as best pleaseth himself, or as he shall be advised to by his Councill, and how any man living can so far know my mind, to prepare such an In­strument for me, I leave the world to judge.

This Notion did arise from one Roll of Parchment onely, brought over by Capt. Tanner, and if we do but consider, that all Law process was then in Parchment, it would serve but a little while for that use; for it contains not above sixty sheets.

I am likewise gropeing in the darke, to finde out how the Forceing of the people at the Eastward to take Patents (although I know of no such thing done) gave a Rise to the late unhappy Invasion by the Indians, [Page 17] unless by that meames, they were deprived of those Quit-Rents and and Acknowledgements, which by a base & dishonourable Agreement the people of those parts some time since submitted to pay them, as their Lords and Masters.

19. That our Commons might be begg'd, is not very strange, but that the Governour must be criminall because such a thing is asked of him, is the most wonderfull thing in the world. To whome have they been granted, or for which of his creatures have they been measured out? If Lieut' Col' Lidget be instanced, how came he to be the Governour's Creature, that hath so long liv'd among us in Reputation equall to the best of us, and whose Fortunes were not so narrow that he needed a de­pendancy upon any body, and estate & interest in Charles-town Lands e­qualled if not exceeded any man's there, so his Right to the Grant ought to be preferr'd.

If Clarks-Island, (granted to Mr. Clarke of Plimouth) I must tell you 'tis not within the Plimouth Patent, and therefore grantable at the plea­sure of the King, which was the Opinion of the Councill in that Case, and neither of the before-mentioned Grants, nor indeed any other, did ever pass without their Approbation and consent; and this is all that I know of that can be objected.

20. What an Age do we live in now, and how wonderful a thing is it, that it should be counted a Crime in a land so well govern'd as once New-England was after a legall Tryal & Conviction, to punish & fine men for a Riot and the Contempt of Authority, in the highest Na­ture imaginable? For what less was it for the Number of three or more to meet together, throw downe & remove the Land marks sett up by the Surveyor Generall thereunto Authorized by the Governours War­rant? And thus is the Case and no otherwise.

21. That any of the Councill were ever denied Admittance to that Board, is a thing so apparently false, that I'm sure not a man amongst them but must justify the Governour in that point; who was alwaies so far from such a method, that altho there was a certain day appointed ed for their Meeting every week, well knowne to them all, yet it was a frequent thing for him, to send on purpose to Salem, and o­ther Neighbouring parts, for the Gentlemen that lived there: and I have seen the Messengers Account, wherein he Chargeth a con­siderable summe of money for Horse hire on those Errands. 'Tis very well knowne, his Excellency hath waited many houres for several of the Gentlemen that live in Towne, and would never sit, un­till [Page 18] they came. And as he hath never done, nor ordered the least mat­ter relateing to the Government, without their Advice and Consent, so he never did it without a sufficient Number to make a Quorum, which was Seven.

22. There was never any other course taken, to hinder Mr. Mather's Voyage to England, than what the Law allowes, neither can the Govern­ment, without a great deal of Injustice, be charged with any thing rela­ting to that matter, for none in place knew his errand.

There was a particular difference between Mr. Randoph & him, and I never heard of any other course taken by Mr. Randolph than the ordinary Writt in such Cases usual, which was so far from Retarding his Voyage, that an Attourny's entring a common Appearance in that Case, would have been sufficient to have discharged him if the Writt had been served.

23. Suppose his Majestie promised Mr. Mather a Magna Charta, for redress of Grievances, and that his Excellency should be wrote unto, to forbear the measures he was upon, yet no such thing being done, he was Obliged to the Observance of his Majesties Commands, before Signified to him in his Letters Patents, which was a sufficient warrant to him, un­till he should receive something subsequent to contradict it.

24. That our Churches and and Ministers have been discouraged, is so generall an head, and the rest of the Declaration so particular, that it gives me cause to suspect the Truth of it, and I shall hardly alter my O­pinion, until any one of you be instanced who kept himself within his Province, and onely meddled with that which belonged to him.

Tis the Church of England, that have most reason to Complain, onley we cry whore first. Has not their Minister been publiquely Affronted, & hindred from doing his Duty? What scandalous Pamphlets have been printed to vilify the Liturgy? And are not all of that Communion daily called Papist dogs & Rogues to their Faces? How often has the pluck­ing down the Church been threatned? One while, it was to be con­verted to a Schoole, & anon it was to be given to the French Protestants; and whoso will but take the pains to survey the Glass Windows, will easily discover the marks of a malice not common. I believe tis the First National Church that ever lay under such great disadvantages, in a place where those that dissent from her must expect all things from her grace and favour.

25. Should I undertake to recount all the particulars of the late Indian Rebellion, this would swell to a bulk bigger than ever I designed it, I shall onely tell you, We must look at home for the Reasons of those trou­bles [Page 19] which is well knowne began when his Excellency was at New-York; and that the Folly and Rashness of the people, drew it on their owne heads. The Governours Conduct in that affair has been so prudent and discreet, that I have no Reason to doubt but the Councill, into whose hands all the Papers relating to that business did fall, are very well sa­tisfyed with it. Things were brought to that pass, that if our unhap­py domestic Troubles had not intervened, the War before this time would have been advantageously finished, without any Rates or Taxes on the Countrey, for by His Excellencies good husbandry, the standing Revenue would have defrayed the Charge. Tis true, We have lost some of our friends and Relations, in that Expedition, but could the Governour keep them alive? Are not Diseases in Armies, as fatall to men as the Sword? When Death comes, tis not to be avoided; and we see that all our art & care hath not been sufficient to preserve our dearest friends at home, from the greater Mortality which hath run thro' the Countrey. Did any of them dye Neglected? Which of them wanted any thing to be had in these parts? Did his Excellency lye up­on Beds of downe, and fare deliciously every day? No, the same Meat, the same Drink, the same Lodging in their Quarters & Marches, were common to all, only He was generally the last taken care for. To what a degree of Madness & impiety are we then grown, so falesly & maliciously to recriminate a person who hath so generously exposed himself to the hardships of that cold & uncomfortable Climate, & the Fatigues of War, against a barbarous and savage people? And certainly if God Almighty hath not given us over to believe lies, our eyes must be by this time open, & we cannot but knowe, we have been put-upon, shamm'd and abused, who are Popish Commanders in the Army? Will any man bare-fac'd averr so great an Untruth? It must be confess'd, there was one Com­mander & no more under that Circumstance; but what had he to do with the Forces? His Post was the Command of the King's Souldiers & Fort at Pemaquid, and was not Commissionated for the Army; besides if he had, hath he not lived long amongst us? Did any one ever question his ability, Courage, Fidelity or Conduct, and ought not that Liberty of Conscience, which has been so hotly preached up, even to the Encou­ragement of immoral Acts amongst us▪ to be equally beneficiall to him with other men? Especially when the Gentlemen in the Countrey were so far from offering their Service in the Expedition, that some of the most eminent amongst them have absolutely refused the service. And I have been told, the Governour's proposalls to the Councill, about his [Page 20] going to the Eastward met with no Opposition, lest some of the Mili­tary men there, should have been bound in Honour to have taken that Employment upon themselves.

26. That some of the English Plantations in the West-Indies, which are contiguous to the French, should be Alarm'd, is no wonder, for they were ever jealous of their Neighbourhood, and always stood upon their Guard; But that We should be afraid of being delivered up to the French; when there is neither War betwixt the two Crownes, nor any Frenchmen that we can yet heare of, to receive us, is one of the most un­accountable things in the world. From what parts must they come? from Canada we know they cannot; they have Reason enough to look to themselves, for they are more afraid than we: France have their hands full at home, and its well knowne they cannot spare any from the West-Indies; they made their utmost effort against Estatia, and by the best intelligence we can get in that Service or War, there was not one Friggat. Must they then drop out of the Clouds, or do we expect a Fleet from Utopia? Certainly this must needs convince any considering man that we have been extreamly abused; and we must be stupid and sence­lesse to think that Sr. Edmond Andros, and ten or twelve men more (for that is all the number said to be concerned in this wonderfull plott) could they be guilty of so horrid a wickednesse & impiety) were able to deliver so many Thousand men well appointed, into the hands of a few Frenchmen, who from God knows whence, were to come the Lord knows when.

27. That it was either our Duty to God, or that we had either the Nobility, Gentry or Commons of England, for our President, I can­not by any means allow, and I am amaz'd to see Christians call that a Du­ty, which God has so remarkably shewed his displeasure against in all Countries and Ages. Is not Rebellion as the sin of Witchcraft? Numb. 11, 12, 16. Who was it that sent the Leprosie amongst the children of Israel for their Murmurring? Psal. 78. Or how came the Sudden fire with which they were burnt up? How many Thousands perished by the Pestilence? Or were they a few that were stung to death with the fiery Serpents? Do we not read, that The earth opened and swallowed up some of their Captaines, with their wives and Children quick, which horrible destruction fell upon the Israelites for their murmurring against Moses, whome God had ap­pointed their Head & Chiefe Magistrate? What shall I say of Absalom? What of Achitophel? Or what of Sheba? Holy Writt is so full of Ex­amples of the like nature, that no body can esteem that a Duty which is so often testifyed against. And as it is far from being our duty to God, [Page 21] so there is no parallel between the proceedings of the Lords Spirituall & Temporall in England and ours here; for the Designe of establishing Po­pery & Arbitrary Government there, was so evident, that no room was left for the least doubt of it. That there could be a Contrivance to introduce Popery here, is altogether ridiculous, & incredible. For, who was to have effected it? Could these sew of the Church of England, who with the hazzard of their lives and fortunes so lately opposed it in En­rope, and that in all Ages have been the onely Bulwark against it? Or were the Presbiterians, Independants, or Annabaptists to have brought this about? It must have been one of these, for'I dare be bold to say, there are not two Roman-Catholicks betwixt this and New-Yorke; and I think the others are not likely to accomplish it; which makes it plaine to me there could not be any such designe.

I have sufficiently demonstrated in the third Article, the little Right we have to any other Government in the Plantations, and that we can­not justly call that Arbitrary, which by the Law we are obliged to sub­mit to: so that betwixt theire Condition and ours, there can be no Parity.

As their Reasons and ours were different, so are the Measures which have been taken: for His late Hignesse the Prince of Orange, haveing well weighed and considered the tottering Condition of the Protestant Re­ligion all over Europe, thought it was high time for Him to take up Arms, as well for His owne Preservation; as that of his Neighbours and Allies. We do not finde, that, notwithstanding the danger that hung over their Heads, the people of England took up armes to right themselves, but instead thereof, they became humble suppliants to His Highness for his Favour and Protection, which He was pleased to grant them. Neither do we finde, that the Lords Spirituall & Temporall assumed any Autho­rity, for which they had no colour of Law: as they are Peers, they are invested with the highest Authority, are the Grand Conservators of the Peace of the Nation: they never left their Duty and Allegiance to his late Majesty, untill he first left the Kingdome, and all things were trans­acted in his Name, and by his Authority untill the very minute the Prince was proclaimed, who came, not by Force to Conquer and Subject the Nation to a forreigne power, nor to subvert and destroy the Lawfull Government; but to maintaine & support the same in a peaceable man­ner, by a Free Parliament, for which his Majestie issued forth his Writts, and had he thought fit to have stayd untill their sitting, all Griveances might have been redressed: the Prince or Peers never abrogated nor [Page 22] altered any of the lawful powers of the Nation, but strengthened & con­firmed all that were capable of bearing Office, by which there was al­waies a due Administration of Justice: The Sword was never said to rule & sway, and by consequence that Confusion and Disorder avoided which our Illegall & Arbitrary Proceedings have precipitated us into.

As to the Fancifull Stories of Macquaes, Subterranean Vaults, Fire­works, French Friggots, Poisoning the Souldiers to the Eastward &c. they are so apparently false & strangely ridiculous, that by this time no man in his wits can believe them, and I need no Argument to confute the Credit of those monstrous follies, since time and Experience have sufficiently demonstrated them to be meer Lyes & Inventions.

And now I hope all sober thinking men are convinced, That the before alledged Reasons, are in themselves either absolutely false, or of little moment, and consequently no sufficient grounds for us to take up Arms. All that remains on this head therefore, will be to shew,

1st. That If all the Reasons had been true, yet it could not justifie our Pro­ceedings. And,

2. If our Condition had been as bad, and our Grievances really as great as we were made believe, these measures could never Mend the one nor Redresle the other.

The most excellent Grotius hath so learnedly wrote upon the first of these, that I shall presume to use no other Argument than his own upon that head, which pray consider.

‘Private men may without doubt (saith he) [ Grot. de jure Belli & Pacis lib. 1. cap. 4. Quest. 1.] make War against private men, as the Travel­ler against the Theife or Robber: So may Soveraigne Princes & States, against Soveraign Princes, as David against the King of the Ammon­ites. Private men may make war against Princes, if not theire owne, as Abraham against the King of Babylon and his Neighbours. So may Soveraign Princes against private men, whether they be their owne subjects, as David against Ishbosheth and his party; or Strangers, as the Romans against Pirates. The onely doubt is whether any person or persons, publique or private, can make a lawful War against those that are set over them, whether supream or subordinate unto them:’ And in the First place,

‘It is on all hands granted, That they that are Commissionated by the highest powers, may make War against theire inferiors, as Nehemiah against Tobia & Sanballat, by the Authority of [...].’ But whe­ther [Page 23] it be lawful for Subjects to make warre against those who have the supream power over them, or against such as act by, & according to their Authority is the thing in question. It is also by all good men ac­knowledged, That if the Commands of a Prince shall manifestly contra­dict, either the Law of Nature, or the Divine precepts, they are not to be obeyed: for the Apostles when they urged that Maxim, ( Act. 4.) Deo magis quam hominibus obediendum, That God is rather to be obeyed than men, unto such as forbad them to preach in the Name of Jesus, did but appeal to a principle of right Reason, which Nature had insculp't in eve­ry mans breast: and which Plato expresseth in almost the very same words. But yet, if either for this or any other cause, any Injury be of­fered unto us, because it so please him that hath the Soveraigne power, it ought rather to be patiently tolerated than by Force resisted: For al­though we do not owe an active Obedience to such commands of Princes, yet we do owe a passive; though we ought not to violate the laws of God or of Nature to fulfill the Will of the greatest Monarch, yet ought we rather patiently to sub­mit so whatsoever he shall inflict upon us for not Obeying, than by Resistance to violate our Countryes Peace. The best and safest Course we can steer in such a case, is, Either by Flight to preserve our selves, or resolvedly to undergo whatsoever shall be imposed upon us.

2. War against Superiors as such, is unlawful. And naturally all men have a Right to repell Injuries from themselves by Resisting them (as we have already said) but Civil Societies being once Instituted for the Pre­servation of the Peace, there presently succeeded unto that Common­Wealth, a certain greater Right over us & ours, so far forth as was ne­cessary for that end. And therefore that promiscuous Right that Na­ture gave us to ressist, the Common-Wealth, for the maintaining of good Order and publick Peace, hath a Right to prohibit, which without all doubt it doth; seeing that otherwise it cannot obtain the end it proposeth to it self. For in case that Promiscuous Right of forcible Resistance should be tolerated, it would be no longer a Common-Wealth that is a Sanctuary against Oppression, but a confused Rabble, such as that of the Cyclops, whereof the Poet thus,

A dissolute Company, where All are speakers and none hearers: like to unto that which Valerius records of the Babricii,

Salust makes mention of a wild and savage people living like Beasts in: [Page 24] Woods and mountains, without Lawes and without Government, whom he calls Aborigines: and in another place of the [...], who had neither Lawes, good Customs, nor any Princes to govern them. But Cities cannot subsist without these, Generale pactum est societatis humane Regibus obedire, All humane societies (saith St. Augustine) unanimously agree in this, to obey Kings; So Aeschylus,

And Sophocles,

To the same Tune sings Euripides,

Whereunto agrees that of Tacitus, Principi summum rerum arbitrium Dii dederunt, &c. Subditis obsequii gloria relicta est; God hath invested a Prince with Soveraign power, leaving nothing to Subjects but the Glory of Obedience. And here also,

Wherewith agrees that of Salust, Impune quid vis facere, hoc est Re­gem esse; To do any thing without fear of punishment, is peculiar to Kings: for as Mark Anthony urged in Herod's Case, If he were accountable for what he hath done as a King, he could not be a King. Hence it is, that the Ma­jesty of such as have Soveraign power, whether in one or more, is fenced with so many and so severe Lawes, and the Licentiousnesse of Subjects restrained with such sharp and exquisite Torments; which were unrea­sonable, if to resist them were lawfull. If a Souldier resist his Captain that strikes him, and but lay hold on his Partizan, he shall be cashiered; but if he either breake it, or offer to strike againe, he shall be put to Death: For as Aristotle observes If he that is an Officer strike, he shall not be struck againe.

3. The Unlawfulness of making War against our Superiours, is proved by the Jewish Law. [ Jos. 1. 18. 1. Sam. 8. 11. Deut. 17. 14.]

By the Hebrew Law, He that behaved himself contumaciously against either the High Priest, or against him who was extraordinarily by God ordained to govern his people, was to be put to death; and that which in the eighth Chapter of the first Booke of Samuel, is spoken of the Right of Kings, to him that throughly inspects it, is neither to be understood of their true and just Rights, that is, of what they may do justly and honestly (for the Duty of Kings is much otherwise described Deut 8. 11.) nor is it to be understood barely, of what he will do: for [Page 25] then it had signified nothing that was singular or extraordinary, for pri­vate men do the same to private men: But it is to be understood of such a Fact as usurps or carries with it the priviledge of what is right, that is, that it must not be restisted although it be not right; for Kings have a Right peculiar to themselves, and what in others is punishable in them is, not. That old saying, Summnm jus, summa injuria, Extreme right is extreme Wrong, is best fitted to the Case of Kings, whose absolute power makes that seem right, which strictly taken is not so. There is a main difference between Right in this sense taken, and Just; for in the former sence, it comprehends whatsoever may be done without fear of Punishment: but Just, respect only things lawful and honest. And though some Kings there be, who are (what Servius in Cicero's Philip­picks is commanded to be) Magis justitia quam Juris consults; more re­gardful of their honour and duty than of their power and prerogatives: yet this doth not diminish their Soveraign Right; because if they will they may do otherwise without the danger of being resisted. And there­fore it is added in that place of Samuel before cited, That when the peo­ple should at any time be thus oppressed by their Kings, as if there were no Remedy to be expected from men, they should invoke His help who is the Supream Judge of the whole Earth. So that whatsoever a King doth, tho' the same done by an inferior person would be an Injury, yet being done by him is Right. As a Judge is said Jus reddere, to do Right, though the Sentence he gives be unrighteous.

4. By the Gospel-Law. When Christ in the New-Testament Com­manded to give Caesar his due, doubtless he intended that his Disciples should yield as great, if not a greater Obedience, as well active as passive unto the higher power, than what was due from the Jews to their Kings: which St. Paul, (who was best able to interpret his Masters Words) expounding Romans 13. doth at large describe the duty of Subjects; Charging those that resist the power of Kings, with no less Crime than Rebellion against God's Ordinance, and with a Judgement as great as their Sin: For, saith he, They that do so resist shall receive unto themselves dam­nation. And a little afer he urgeth the Necessity of our Subjection, Not altogether for fear but for conscience, as knowing, that he is the minister of God for our Good. Now if there be a necessity of our Subjection, then there is the same necessity for our not resisting, because he that resists is not subject. Neither did the Apostle mean such a necessity of subjection as arisesh from an apprehension of some worse inconvenience that might follow upon our resistance, but such as proceeds from the sense of some benefit that we receive by it, [Page 26] whereby we stand obliged in duty, not unto man onely, but unto God; So that, He that Resists the power of the supream Magistrate, incurrs a double Punishment (saith Plato) First from God, for breaking that good Or­der which he hath constituted amongst men. And Secondly, From the Common Wealth, whose righteous Laws, made for the preservation of the publick peace, are by Resistance Weakned, and the Common-Wealth thereby endangered. For canst thou believe ( saith Plato) that any City or Kingdom can long stand, when the publick Decrees of the Senate shall be willfully broken and trampled upon by the over-swelling power of some private men, who in struggling against the Execution of the Laws, do, as much as in them lies, dissolve the Common­wealth, & consequntly bring all into confusion. The Apostle therefore fortifies this Necessity of publick Subjection to Princes with 2 main Reasons: First because God had constituted and approved of this order of Commanding and Obeying; and that not only under the Jewish, but under the Chri­stian Law: Wherefore the powers that are set over us are to be Obser­ved (not servilely, superstitiously, or out of Fear, but with free, ra­tional, & generous Spirits) tanquam a Diis datae, as being given by the Gods, saith Plato: or as St. Paul, tanquam a Deo ordinatae as if ordain­ed by God himself. Which Order as it is Originally God's, so by giv­ing it a Civil Sanction, it becoms ours also: For thereby we add as much Authority to it as we can give. The other Reason is drawn ab uti­li, from Profit: because this Order is constituted for our good, and therefore in Conscience is to be obeyed and not resisted.

But here some men may say, That to bear injuries is not at all profi­table unto us, whereunto some men (haply more truly than apositely to the meaning of the Apostle) give this Answer, That patiently to bear Injuries, conduceth much to our Benefit, because it entitles us to a Re­ward, far transcending our Sufferings, as St. Paul testifies. But though this also be true, yet it is not (as I conceive) the proper and genuine sense of the Apostles words, which doubtless have Respect to that Uni­versal Good, whereunto this Order was first instituted, as to its pro­per end; which was the publick peace, wherein every particular man, is as much concerned, if not much more than in his Private. (for what Protection can good Laws give, if Subjects may refuse to yield their obedience to them; whereas, by the Constant observance of good Laws, all Estates, both publick and private, do grow up and flourish toge­ther.) [ Plato.] And certainly these are the good Fruits that we re­ceive from the supream Powers, for which in Conscience we owe them Obedience. For no man did ever yet wish ill to himself. (But he that [Page 27] resists the power of the Magistrate, and willfully violates the Laws esta­blished, doth in effect (as far as in him is) dissolve his Countrey's peace, and will in the end bury himself also in the ruins of it.) [ Plato.] Be­sides, the Glory of Kings consists in the prosperity of their Subjects. When Sylla had by his Cruelty, almost depopulated, not Rome only, but all Italy, one seasonably admonisht him, Sinendos esse aliquos vivere, ut essent, quibus imperet; That some should be permitted to live, over whom he might rule as a King. [ Florus. Aug. de civ. Dei. Lib. 3. cap. 28.] It was a common Proverb among the Hebrews, Nisi Potestas publica esset, alter alterum vivum deglutiret; Were it not for the Soveraign Powers, every Kingdom would be like a great Pond, wherein the greater Fish would al­waies devour the Lesser. Agreeable whereunto is that of Chrysostome, Unless there were a power over us to restrain our inordinate Lusts, Men would be more fierce & cruel than Lions & Tygers, not only biting, but eating & devouring one another. Take away Tribunals of Justice, and you take away all Right, Property and Dominion: No man can say, this is mine House, this my Land, these my Goods or my Servants: but Omnia erunt Fortiorum, the longest Sword would take all. [Chrys de statuis 6. ad Eph.] The migh­ty man could be no longer secure of his estate than until a mightier than he came to dispossess him; The weaker must alwaies give place to the Stronger: and where the strength was equal the loss would be so too; and this would at length introduce a general Ataxy, which would be far more perilous than a perfect Slavery. Wherefore seeing that God hath Established (and humane Reason upon Tryal approved of) Sove­veraign Empire as the best Preservative of humane Societies, that eve­ry man should yield Obedience thereunto is most rational: For without Subjection there can be no Proctection.

Object. But here it will he objected, That The Commands of Princes do not alwaies tend to the Publique Good, and therefore when they decline from that end for which they were ordained, they ought not to be obeyed. To which I answer,

That though the Supream Magistrate doth sometimes, either through Fear, Anger, Lust, Coveteousness, or such like inordinate passions, baulk the ordinary path of Justice and Equity, yet are these (hapning but seldome) to be passed over as personal blemishes, which (as Tacitus rightly observes) are abundantly recompensed by the more frequent ex­amples of better Princes. (Besides the Lives of Princes are to be con­sidered with some grains of allowance, in respect of those many provo­cations and opportunities they have to offend, which private men have [Page 28] not; All men have their Failings, we our selves have ours; and in case we will admit of none in Kings, we must not rank them amongst men but Gods. The Moon hath her spots; Venus her Mole; and if we can find nothing under the Sun without blemish, why should we expect perfection in Kings? He is very uncharitable that judges of Rulers by some few of their evil Deeds, passing over many of their good ones. Seeing therefore that there is in all men's lives, as in our best Coin, an intermixture of good and evil; it is sufficient to denominate a Prince good, if his Vertues excel his Errors. Besides, to charge the Vices of Kings upon the Government, as they usually do who affect Innovati­on, is but a Cheat: For what is this, but to condemn the Law for the Corruption of some Lawyers: Or Agriculture, because some men do curse God for a Storm? Si mentiar, Ego monttor, non Negotium; If I do lye, (saith the Merchant in St. Augustine) it is I that am to be be blamed not my Calling. And if some Princes do prevaricate in some things, they and not their Function are to be blamed. But as to Laws, tho they cannot be so made as to fit every mans Case, yet it sufficeth to denominate them good, if they obviate such disorders as are frequently practised, and so do good to the generality of the People. But as to such cases, which because they rarely happen, cannot so easily be provi­ded against by particular Laws, even these also are understood to be re­strained by general Rules. For, though the Reason of the Law being particularly applyed to that special Case, hold not; yet in the General, under which special Cases may lawfully be Comprehended, it may. And much better is it so to do, than to live without Law, or to permit every man to be a law to himself. Very apposite to this purpose is that of Seneca, [ Lib. 7. de Benef. cap. 16.] Better is it not to admit of some excuses, though just from a sew, than that All should be permitted to make whatsoever they please. Memorable is that of Pericles in Thucydides, [Lib.2.] Better it is for private men, that the Common-Wealth flourish, though they thrive not in it, than that they should abound & grow rich in their own private estates, and the Common-Wealth pine and Wither: For if the whole be ruined, every pri­vate mans Fortunes must needs be ruined with it: but if the Common-Wealth flourish, every private mans estate, though in it self weake, may in time be re­paired. Wherefore, since the state if well ordered, can easily support any pri­vate mans fortunes, but a private mans estate, though never so well ordered, cannot repair the loss of the publique state: why do ye not rather contribute your utmost care to advance the Publique, than (as ye now do) seek to build your own private Fortunes upon the publique Ruines? Wherewith agrees that of [Page 29] Ambrose, [ de Off. Lib. 3.] Eadem est singulorum utilltas, quae Univer­sorum; The Profit which the Common-Wealth receives, redounds to every pri­vate man. And that also in the Law, Semper non quod privatim inter­est ex sociis, sed quod communi societate expedit, servari debet; Evermore, not that which particularly availeth any one party, but that which con­duceth to the Benefit of the Common Society is to be observed. (When the Common people in Rome began to Mutinee by reason of some Taxes extraordinarily imposed on them, Lavinus the Consul exhorted the Senate, to encourage the people by their own example; and to that very end advised every Senator to bring into the Senate-house, all the Gold, Sil­ver and Brass Money he had that it might be delivered to the Triumviri for the publick service: adding this reason, If our City overcome, no man needs to fear his own [...]; but if it fall, let no man think to pre­serve his own [ Liv. 1. 26.]) For as Plato rightly observes, What is common strengthens a city, but what enricheth private families only, weakens and dissolves it: And therefore it concerns both Princes and subjects to pre­fer the Affairs of the Common-Wealth, before their own either pleasure or Profit) It is a very true Observation of Xenophon's, He that in an Ar­my behaves himself seditiously against his General, sins against his own Life. And no less true is that of Jamblicus, No man should think himself a Loser by what the Common-wealth gains, for every private mans loss is sufficiently re­compensed in the publick profit: For as in the natural body, so doubtless in the Civil, In totius Salute, Salus est partium; the well being of every part, con­sists in the safety of the whole. But without doubt, among those things that are publick, the chief & principal is that aforesaid Order of well Com­manding and well Obeying: which cannot consist where private Sub­jects assume that Licence of resisting the publick Magistrate: which is excellently described by Dion Cassius, whose words sound much to this sense, I cannot conceive it seemly for a Prince to submit to his subjects, for there can be no safety, where the feet are advanced above the Head, or wher they un­dertake to govern, whose Duty it is to be governed. What a dismal Confusi­on would it introduce in a Family if Children should be permitted to despise their Parents or Servants to dispute the Commands of their Masters? In what a desperate Condition is that Patient, that will not be ruled in all things by his Physitian? And what hopes can there be of that Ship, where the Marriners re­fuse to obey their Pilot? Surely God hath ordained, and humane Reason up­on tryal hath found it necessary, that for the preservation of humane Society, some should Command, and some Obey. To the Testimony of St. Paul, we shall add that of St. Peter, whose words are these, Honour the King, [Page 30] Servants, be ye subjects to your Masters with all fear, and not only to the good & gentle, but also to the froward: For this is thank-worthy, if a man for conscience sake toward God endure Grief, suffering wrongfully, for what glo­ry is it, if when ye he buffeted for your faults ye take it patiently? But if when ye do well, & suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. 1 Pet. [...]. 17, 18, 19. And this he by and by confirms by Christ's own Example, which Clemens also in his Constitutions thus expresseth, The servant that feareth God, saith he, will serve his Master also with all faithfulness, yea, though he be impious and unjust. Whence we may ob­serve two things: First, That under the subjection that servants are in, even to hard Masters, is also couched that of Subjects unto Kings, though Tyrannical. And therefore, as a little before he commanded Subjection to every humane Ordinance; that is, to the Laws and Con­stitutions of Princes without distinction, (for when that Epistle was written, there were very few Princes that were not Idolaters) yet sub­mit we must, saith St. Peter, for all that; and that, propter Dominum, for the Lord's sake. So what follows in the same Chapter being built up­on the same foundation, respects the Duty as well of subjects as of Ser­vants. And so requires the same Obedience, as well passive as Active; Such as we usually pay to our Parents, according to that of the Poet,

And also that of Terence,

And that likewise of Cicero in his Oration for Cluentias, Men ought not only to conceal the injuryes done unto them by their parents, but to bear them with patience. A young man of Eretria that had been long educated un­der Zeno being demanded, What he had learned? Answered, Meekly to bear his Father's Wrath. So Justin relates of Lysimachus, That he endu­red the Reproaches of the King, with the same calmness of Spirit, as if he had been his Father. [ Lib. 15.] Ferenda sum Renum ingenia, The Humours of Kings most be endured: saith Tacitus: [ Ann. 16. Hist. 6.] And in another place he tells us, That Good Emperours are to be wish­ed for, but whatsoever they are, they must be obeyed. So also Livy, As the Rage of our Parents, so the Cruelty of our Countrey are no ways to be becalmed, but by patience and Sufferance. For which Claudius high­ly extols the Persians, who obeyed all their Kings equally tho never so cruel.

[Page 31] 5. Neither did the Practice of the Primitive Christians swerve from this Law of God, which is an undeniable Argument that they so understood it. For though the Roman Emperours were sometimes the very worst of men, and deadly Enemies to the Christian Faith; yea, though there wanted not such under their Government, who under the specious pre­tence of freeing the Common-Wealth from Tyranny and Oppression, took Arms against them, yet could they never perswade the Christians to join with them. In the Constitutions of Clemens we read, Regiae po­testati resistere Nefas, To resist the power of a King is impious. Tertul­tian in his Apology writes thus, What was that Cassius that conspired a­gainst the life of Julius Caesar? What was that Poscennius Niger, that in love to his own countrey, took Arms in, Syria, as Clodius Albinus did in France & Britain, against that bloody Emperour Septimius Severus? Or What was that Plautianus, who to set the Common-Wealth free from Tyranny, attempted the Life of the same Emperour in his own pallace? What was that AElius Laetus, who having first poysoned that infamous Emperour Commodus, fearing it should not take that effect which he desired, did afterwards hire Nar­cissus a strong Wrestler to strangle him? Or What was that Parthenius, (whose fact Tertullian doth so much detest) who being Chamberlain to that execrable Tyrant Domitian, yet killed him in his own Chamber? What (saith Tertullian) were all these? Surely not Christians, but Ro­mans. Nay, So abominated they were by Christians, that Ter­tullian seems to glory in this, that though Christians were every where reproached as Enemies, nay Traitors to the Imperial Crown, yet could they never find any of them, either stained with that Crime, or so much as favouring those Treasonable Practices of either Cassius, Niger­on Albinus. When St. Ambrose was commanded by the Emperour Va­lentinus to give up his Church to be Garrison'd by Souldiers, though he took it to be an injury done, not only to himself and his Congregation, but even unto Christ himself; yet would he not take any advantage of the commotions it made among the People, to make Resistance. [ See Gra­tian c. 23. q. 8.] If the Emperour (saith he) had commanded what was in my power to give, were it mine House, Land, Goods, Gold or Silver, how readily should I obey; Whatsoever is mine I would willingly of­fer: but the Temple of God, I cannot give away, nor can I yield it up to any man: Cum ad custodiendum, non ad tradendam illud acceperim, Since it was committed to mee to defend and to keep, but not to betray. And whereas the people being enraged thereby, did offer their Assistance to repel the Souldiers, he refused it saying, Coaclus repuguare non novi, [Page 32] Though provoked and compelled thereunto, yet withstand or resist I can­not; grieve and weep, and mourn I can, against Arms, Souldiers and Goths: I have no other weapons [...] Tears: for these are the only Forts and Muniments of a Priest: Auter nes debco nes possum resistere, Other­wise I neither ought nor can resist. [ Lib. 5. Orat, in Anxen.] And pre­sently after, being commanded to appease the Tumult, he replied, That not to excite them was in his power, but being exasperated and enra­ged, to appease them was in the sole power of Him, who when He plea­sed, could still the ragings of the Seas & the madness of the people. [ Epist. 33.] And in another place he writes thus, Will ye hale me to prison, or cast me into chains? I am willing to suffer, neither shall I guard my self with multitudes of people who offer themselves to defend me. Nei­ther would he make use of the Forces of Maximus, when offered against the Emperor, though an [...] and a grievous Persecutor of the Church. In imitation of whom, Gregory the Great, in one of his epistles confesseth, That if he would have engaged himself in the Death of the Lambards, that Nation had at that day, had neither King, Dukes, nor Earls, but had been reduced into extreme Confusion. [ Greg. 1. 6. Ep. 1.] Nazi­anzen informs us, That Julian the Apostate was diverted from some bloody designs he intended against the Church by the Tears of Christians: Adding withal, That These are our best Preservatives against Persecutions. [Naz Orat. 1. in Julian.] And because a great part of his Army were Christians, therefore his cruelty towards them, would have been not injurious to the Church of Christ only, but would at that time have much endagerd the Common-Wealth. Unto all which we may also add that of St. Augustine, where expounding those places of St. Paul, he saith, Even for the preservation of our own Lives, we ought to sub­mit tothe supreme Power, & nor to resist them in whatsoever they shall take away from us.

6. Inferior Magistrates ought not to resist the Supream. Some very learned men there are even this age, who accommodating themselves tro servilely to the times and places wherein they live, do perswade themselves first, and then others, That though this licence of Resisting the Supream power be inconsistent with the Condition of Private men, yet it may agree with the Rights of inferior Magistrates; may, further, that they sin in case they do it not: which Opinion is to be exploded, as seditious For as in Logick there is a Genus which is called Subalterne, which though it be comprehensive of all that is under it, as a liv­ing Creature comprehends both man and Beast; yet hath it a Cenus a­bove [Page 33] it, in respect whereof it is but a Species: As a living Creature is to a body, which comprehends all sorts of bodies, both animate and inanimate. The like we may say of Magistrates, some are Supream, who rule all, and are ruled by none; others are Subordinate, who in respect of private men, are publick Persons, governing like Princes; But in respect of the Supream Magistrate are but private men, and are commanded as Subjects. For the power or faculty of Governing, as it is derived from the Supream power, so it is subject unto it, And whatso­ever is done by the inferior Magistrate, contrary to the Will of the Su­pream, is null, and reputed but as a private Act, for want of the Stamp of Publick Authority. All Order (say Philosophers) doth necessarily relate to somewhat that is first and highest, from whence it takes its Rise and Beginning. Now they that are of this Opinion, that inferi­our Magistrates may resist the Supream, seem to introduce such a state of things, as the Poets fansied to have been in Heaven before Majesty was thought on, when the lesser gods denied the prerogative of Jupiter. But this Order or Subordination of one to another, is not only approv­ed of by Common Experience, as in every Family the Father is the head, next unto him the Mother, then the Children, and after them the Ser­vants, and such as are under them: So in every Kingdom, Each power under Higher powers are — And, All Governours are under Government — To which purpose is that notable saying of St. Augustine, Observe (saith he) the degrees of all humane things: If thy Tutor enjoin thee any thing, thou must do it; yet not, in case the Proconsul command the con­trary; neither must thou obey the Consul, if thy Prince command other­therwise: for in so doing thou canst not be said to contemn Authority, but thou chusest to obey that which is highest: Neither ought the lesser powers to be offended, that the greater is preferred before them, for God is the God of order. [ Grat. c. 11. q. 3, Qui resistit.] And that also of the same Father concerning Pilate, Because (saith he) God had in­vested him with such a power as was it self subordinate to that of Caesurs. But it is also approved of by Divine Authority. For St. Peter enjoyns us to be subject unto Kings otherwise than unto Magistrates: To Kings as supream, that is, absolutely, without Exceptions to any other Com­mands than those directly from God: who is so far from justifying our Resistance, that He commands our passive Obedience: But unto Ma­gistrates, as they are deputed by Kings, and as they derive their Autho­rity form them. And when St. Paul subjects every soul to the higher powers, ( Rom. 13.) doubtless he exempts not inferiour Magistrates. [Page 34] Neither do we find among the Hebrews (where there were so many Kings utterly regardless of the Laws both of God & Men) any inferior Ma­gistrates, among whom, some without all question, there were both pious and valiant, that ever arrogated unto themselves this Right of Re­sisting by force, the power of their Kings, without an express command from God, who alone hath an unlimited power and Jurisdiction over them. But on the Contrary, What duties inferior Magistrates owe unto their Kings, though wicked, Samuel will instruct us by his own Example, who though he knew that Saul had corrupted himself, and that God also had rejected him from being King, yet before the people, and before the Elders of Israel, he gives him that Reverence and Respect that was due unto him, (1. Sam. 15. 30.) And so likewise the state of Religion publickly professed, did never depend upon any other hu­mane Authority, but on that of the King, and Sanhedrim. For in that after the King, the Magistrates with the People, engaged themselves to the true Worship and Service of God, it ought to be understood, so far forth as it should be in the power of every one of them. Nay, the very Images of their false gods which were publickly erected, (and therefore could not but be scandalous to such as were truly religious) yet were they never demolished, so far as we can read of, but at the special Command either of the people when the Government was popu­lar, or of Kings, when the Government was kingly. And if the Scrip­tures do make mention of any Violence sometimes offered unto Kings, it is not to justifie the fact, but shew the Equity of the Divine provi­dence in permitting it. And whereas they of the contrary perswasion do frequently urge that excellent Saying of Trajan the Emperour, who delivering a Sword to a Captain of the Praetorian Band, said, Hoc pro me mere, si recte impero, si male, contra me: Use this Sword for me if I Go­vern well, but if otherwise, against me. We must know, that Trajan (as appears by Pliny's Panegyrick) was not willing to assume unto him­self Regal power, but rather to behave himself as a good Prince, who was willing to submit to the Judgment of the Senate and people, whose Decrees he would have that Captain to execute, though it were against himself. Whose Example both Pertinax and Macrinus did afterwards follow, whose excellent Speeches to this purpose are Recorded by Herodi­an. The like we read of M. Anthony. who refused to touch the publick sure without the consent of the Roman Senate.

7. Of Resistance in case of inevitable Necessity.] But the Case will yet be more Difficult, Whether this Law of not-Resisting do oblige us, [Page 35] when the Dangers that threaten us be extream, and otherwise inevita­ble. For some of the Laws of God Himself, though they sound absolute­ly, yet seem to admit of some tacite Exceptions in cases of Extream Necessity: For so it was, by the wisest of the Jewish Doctors, expresly determined concerning the Law of their Sabbath, in the times of the Ha­samonaans, whence rose that famous Saying among them, Periculum ani­mae impellit Sabbatum; The danger of a man's Life drives away the Sab­bath. When the Jew in Synesius, was accused for the breach of the Sab­bath, he excuseth himself by another Law, and that more forcible, say­ing, We were in manifest jeopardy of our lives. When Bacchides had brought the Army of the Jews into a great Strait on their Sabbath day, placing cing his Army before them and behind them, the River Jordan being on both sides; Jonathan thus bespake his Souldiers, Let us go up now & fight for our lives, for it standeth not with us to day, as in times past. (1 Mac. 9. 43. 44, 45.) Which case of Necessity is approved of, even by Christ Himself, as well in this Law of the Sabbath, as in that of not eating the Shew-bread. And the Hebrew Doctors pretending the Authority of an ancient Tradition, do rightly interpret their Laws made against the eat­ing of meats forbidden, with this tacite Exception: Not that it was not just with God to have obliged us even unto death, but that some Laws of His are conversant about such matters as it cannot easily be be­lieved that they were intended to have been prosecuted with so much Rigour as to reduce us to such an Extremity, as to dy rather than to disobey them, which in humane laws doth yet further proceed. I deny not, but that some Acts of Vertue are so strictly enjoyned, that if we perform them not, we may justly be put to Death: As for a Centinel to forsake his Station. But neither is this rashly to be understood to be the Will of the Law-giver. Nor do men assume so much Right over either themselves or others, unless it be when, & so far forth as extreme Necessity requires it. For all humane laws are so constituted, or so to be understood as that there should be some allowance for humane Frailty. The right understanding of this Law of Resisting or not-Resisting the High­est powers in cases of inevitable Necessity, seems much to depend upon the Intention of those who first entered into Civil Society, from whom the Right of Government is devolved upon the persons governing: who had they been demanded, Whether they would have imposed such as yoke upon all Mankind as death it self, rather than in any case by force to re­pel the Insolencies of their Superiours; I much question whether they would have granted it, unless it had been in such a case, where such [Page 36] Resistance could not be made without great Commotions in the Com­mon Wealth, or the certain Destruction of many Innocents, for what Charity commends in such a case to be done, may, I doubt not, pass for an humane Law. But some may say, that this rigid Obligation, To dye rather than at any time to Resist Injuries done by our Superiours, is not imposed on us by any Humane, but by the Divine Law. But we must observe, That men did not at first unite themselves in Civil Society, by any special Command from God, but voluntarily, out of a sence they had of their own impotency to repel force and Violence whilst they lived solitarily, and in Families appart; whence the civil power takes it Rise. For which cause it is that St. Peter calls it an humane Ordinance, although it be else-where called a Divine Ordinance, because this wholesome Con­stitution of men was approved of by God Himsef. But God in approv­ing an humane Law, may be thought to approve of it as an humane law, & after an humane manner. Barkly (who was the stoutest Cham­pion in defending Kingly Power) doth notwithstanding thus far allow, That the People or the Nobler part of them, have a Right to defend themselves against cruel Tyranny, and yet he confesseth, that the whole Body of the people is subject unto the King. [ Barkley. Lib. 3. contra. Monarchomach. c. 8.] Now this I shall easily admit, That the more we desire to secure any thing by Law, the more express and peremptory should that Law be, and the fewer exceptions there should be from it; (for they that have a mind to violate that Law, will presently seek shel­ter, and think themselves priviledged by those Exceptions though their Cases be far different;) yet dare I not condemn indifferently either every private man, or every, though lesser part of the people, who as their last Refuge, in cases of extream Necessity, have anciently made use of their Arms to defend themselves, yet with respect had to the Common Good. For David, who (saving in some particular Facts) was so celebrated for his integrity, did yet entertain first four hundred, and afterwards more armed men; to what end unless for the safe­gaurd of his own person, against any violence that should be offered him? But this also we must note, That David did not this until he had been assured, both by Jonathan, and by many other infallible Arguments, that Saul sought his life; and that even then, he never invaded any City, nor made an offensive Warr against any but lurked only for his own security, sometimes in Mountains, sometimes in Caves, and such like devious places, and sometimes in forreign Nations, with this Resolution, to decline all occasions of annoying his own Countrey-men. [Page 37] A Fact parallel to this of David's, we may read in the Maccabees: [...] whereas some seek to defend the Wars of the Maccabees upon this ground: That Antiochus was not a King, but an Usurper; this I account but fri­volous: for in the whole Story of the Macabees, we shall never find An­tiochus mentioned by any of their own party, by any other Title than by that of King; and deservedly: For the Hebrews had long before submitted to the Macedonian Empire, in whose Right Antiochus suc­ceeded. And whereas the Hebrew Laws forbad a Stranger to be set o­ver them, this was to be understood by a voluntary Election, and not by an involuntary Compulsion, through the Necessity of the times. And whereas others say. That the Maccabees did act by the peoples Right, to whom belonged the Right of Governing themselves by their own Laws, neither is this probable: For the Jews being first conquered by Nebuchadonosor, were by the Right of War subject unto him, and after­wards became by the same Law subject to the Medes and Persians, as suc­cessours to the Chaldeans, whose whole Empire did at last devolve up­on the Macedonians. And hence it is. That the Jews, in Tacitus are termed The most servile of all the Eastern Nations; neither did they re­quire any Covenants or Conditions from Alexander or his successours, but yielded themselves freely, without any Limitations or Exceptions, as before they had done unto Darius. And though they were permitted sometimes to use their own Rites, and publickly to exercise their own Laws, yet was not this due unto them by any Law that was added un­to the Empire, but only by a precarious Right that was indulged unto them by the Favour of their Kings. There was nothing then that could justifie the Maccabees in their taking of Arms, but that invincible Law of Extream Necessity which might do it so long as they contained themselves within the bounds of Self-Preservation, and in imitation of David, be­took themselves to secret places, in order to their own security; never offering to make use of their Armes unless violently assaulted. In the mean time, great Care is to be taken, that even when we are thus enforced to defend our selves in cases of certain and extream danger, we spare the person of the King; for they that conceive the carriage of David towards Soul to proceed not so much from the Necessity of Duty, as out of some deeper consideration, are mistaken: for David himself declares, that no man can be innocent that stretcheth forth his hand against the Lord's Annointed: (1. Sam. 26. 9.) Because he very well knew that is was written in the Law, Thou shalt not revile the Gods, that is the Supream Judges: Thou shalt not curse the Rulers of thy people. [Page 38] ( Exod. 22. 28.) In which Law, special mention being made of the Su­pream power; it evidently shews That some special Duty towards them is required of us. Wherefore Optatus Melevit anus speaking of this Fact of David, saith, That God's special Command coming fresh into his memory, did so restrain him, that he could not hurt Saul, though his mortal enemy. Wherefore he brings in David thus reasoning with himself, Volebam ho­stem vincere, sed prius est Divina proecepta observane, Willingly I would overcome mine Enemy, but I dare not transgress the Commands of God. [ Lib. 2.] And Josephus speaking of David after he had cut off Sauls Garment, saith, That his heart smote him: So that he confessed, Injustum facinus erat Regem suum occidere, It was a a wicked act to kill his Soveraign. And presently after, Horrendunt Regem quamvis malum oc­cidere, poenam enim id facienti imminere constat, ab eo qui Regem dedit, It is an horrid act to kill a King, though wicked, for certainly He, by whose providence all Kings reign, will pursue the Regicide with vengeance in­evitably. To reproach any private man falsely is forbidden by the Law, but of a King we must not speak evil, though he deserve it; because as he that wrote the Problems (fathered upon Aristotle) saith, He that speaketh evil of the Governour, scandalizeth the whole City. So Joah concludes concerning Shimei, as Josephus testifies, shalt thou-not dye, who presumest to curse him whom God hath placed in the Throne of the Kingdom? The Laws (saith Julian.) are very severe on the behalf of Princes, for he that is injurious unto them, doth wilfully trample upon the Laws themselves. [ Misopogoris] Now if we must not speak evil of Kings, much less must we do evil against them. David repented but for offer­ing violence to Saul's Garments, so great was the Reverence that he bare to his person, and deservedly: For since their Soveraign power cannot but expose them to the General Hatred, therefore it is fit, that their security should especially be provided for. This, saith Quintilian, is the fate of such as sit at the Stern of Government, that they cannot dis­charge their Duty faithfully, nor provide for the publick safety, without the en­vy of many. (And for this cause are the persons of Kings guarded with such severe Laws, which seeem, like Draco's. to be wrote in blood,) as may appear by those enacted by the Romans, for the security of their Tribunes, whereby their persons became inviolable. Amongst other wise Sayings of the Esseni, this was one, That the persons, of Kings should be held as sacred. And that of Homer was ast noable,

[Page 39] And no marvel. For as St. Chrysostome well observes, If any man kill a sheep, he but lessens the number of them, but if he kill the Shepherd, be dissi­pates the whole flock. The very Name of a King, as Curtius tells us, a­mong such nations as were governed by Kings, was as venerable as that of God. So Artabanus the Persian, Amongst many and those most ex­cellent Laws we have, this seems to be the best, which commands us to adore our Kings as the very image of God who is the Saviour of all. And there­fore as Plutarch speakes, Nec fas, nec licitum est Regis corpori manus in­ferre, It is not permitted by the Laws of God or man, to offer violence to the person of a King. But as the same Plutarch in another place tells us, The principal part of valour is, to save him that saves all. If the eye ob­serve a blow threatning the head, the hand, being instructed by nature, interposeth it self, as preferring the safety of the head (whereupon all other members depend) before their own. Wherefore, as Cassiodore notes, He that with the loss of his own life, Redeems the Life of his Prince, doth well; if in so do­ing he propose to himself the freeing of his own soul, rather than that of another mans body, for as conscience teacheth him to express his fide­lity to his Soveraign; so doth right Reason instruct him to prefer the life of his Prince, before the safety of his own body. But here a more difficult question ariseth; as namely, Whether what was lawful for Da­vid and the Maccabees, be likewise lawful for us Christians: Or whe­ther Christ who so often enjoins us to take up our Cross, do not require from us a greater measure of patience? Surely, where our Superiours threaten us with Death upon the account of Religion, our Saviour ad­vised such as are not obliged by the necessary Duties of their Calling to reside in any one place, to flee, but beyond this, nothing. St. Peter tells us, That Christ in his suffering left us an ensample, who tho' he knew no sin, nor had any guile found in his mouth, yet being reviled, reviled not again, when he suf­fered, he threatned not, but remmitted his cause to him that judgeth righteous­ly (1. Pet. 4. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16.) Nay he adviseth us to give thanks unto God, and to rejoice when we suffer persecution for our Religion: and we may read how mightily Christian Religion hath grown and been advanced by this admirable gift of patience, wherefore how injurious to those ancient Christians (who (living in or near the times of either the Apostles themselves or men truly Apostolical) must needs be well instru­cted in their Discipline, and consequently walked more exactly accor­ding to their Rules, yet suffered death for their saith) how injurious I say, to these men, are they, who hold that they wanted not a Will to resist, but rather a power to defend themselves at the approach of death? [Page 40] Surety Tertullian had never been so imprudent, nay, so impudent as so confidently to have affirmed such an untruth, whereof he knew the Em­peror could not be ignorant, when he wrote thus unto him, If we had a will to take our private Revenge, or to act as publick Enemies, could we want either numbers of men, or stores of warlike Provisions? Are the Moors, Ger­mans, Parthians, or the people of any one Nation, more than those of the whole World? We, though strangers, yet do fill all places in your Dominions; your Cities, Islands, Castles, Forts, Assemblies, your very Camps, Tribes, Coures, Falaces, Senates; only your Temples we leave to your selves: For what war have we not alwaies declared our selves sit and ready, though in Numbers of men we have sometimes been very unequal? How cometh it then to pass, that we suffer Death so meekly, so patiently, but that we are instructed by our Re­ligion, that it is much better to be killed than to kill? Cyprian also tread­ing in his Masters steps, openly declares, That it was from the principles of their Religion, that Christians being apprehended, made no Resistance, nor at­tempted any revenge for injuries unjustly done them, though they wanted neither numbers of men, nor other means to have resisted, but it was their confidence of Some divine Vengeance that would fall upon their persecutors, that made them thus patient, & that perswaded the innocent to give way to the nocent. [Lib. 5.] So Lactantius, We are willing to confide in the Majesty of God, who is able, as well to revenge the contempt done to Himself, as the injuries and hardships done unto us: Wherefore, though our sufferings be such as cannot be expressed, yet we do not mutter a word of discontent, but refer our selves wholly to him who judgeth righteously. And to the same tune sings St. Augustine, When Princes err, they presently make Laws to legitimate their errors, and by those very laws they judge the innocent, who are at length crowned with Mar­tyrdom. [Ep 166.] And in another place, Tyrants are so to be endured by their subjects, & hard Masters by their servants, that both their temporal lives (if possible) may be preserved, and yet their eternal safety carefully provided for: Which he illustrates by the examples of the primitive Christians, Who though they then sojourned upon earth as Pilgrims, and had infinite numbers of nations to resist them, yet chose rather patiently to suffer all manner of tor­ments, than forcibly to resist their persecutors: Neither would they fight to pre­serve their temporal lives, but chose rather not to sight, that so they might ensure unto themselves an eternal. For they endured, Bonds, Stripes, imprisonment the Rack, the Fire, the Cross; they were stead alive, killed, and quartered, and, yet they multiplied; they esteemed this life not worth the fighting for, so that with the loss of it they might purchase what so eagerly they panted after, a better. Of the same opinion was Cyril, as may appear by many notable [Page 41] Sayings of his upon that place of St. John, where he treats of Peter's Sword. The Thebean Legion, we read, consisted of 6666. Souldiers, and all Christians, who when the Emperour Maximianus would have compel­led the whole Army to sacrifice to Idols, first removed their Station to A­gaunus, and when upon fresh orders sent after them, they refused to come, Maximianus commanded his officers to put every tenth man to Death, which was easily done, no man offering to resist: At which time Mau­ritius (who had the chief Command in that Legion, and from whom the Town Agaunus in Switzer-land was afterwards called St. Mauritz, as Eu­cherius, Bishop of Lyons, records) thus bespake his fellow souldiers, How fearful was I lest any of you under the pretence of defending your selves ( as was easie for men armed as ye are to have done) should have attempted by force to have rescued from death those blessed Martyrs? which had you done, I was suf­ficiently instructed by Christs own example to have forbidden it, who expresly re­manded that Sword into its sheath, that was but drawn in his own defence; thereby teaching us that our Christian Faith is much more prevalent than all o­ther arms. This tragick Act being past, the Emperor commanding the same thing to the furvivours, as he had done before to the whole Legion, they unanimously returned him this answer, Tui quidem, Caesar, milites su­mus, &c. We are thy Soldiers, O Caesar, we took arms for the defence of the Roman Empire; we never yet deserted the war, nor betrayed the trust re­posed in us; we were never yet branded with fear or cowardise, but have alwaies observed thy commands, until being otherwise instructed by our Christian Laws, we refuse to worship the devil, or to aproach those altars that are polluted with blood. We find by thy commands, that thou resolvest either to draw us into Idol­atry, or to affright us by putting every tenth man of us to death: make no fur­ther search after those that are willing to lye concealed; but know that we are all of us Christians, all our bodies thou hast indeed under thy power, but our souls are subject only to Christ our redeemer. Then Exupenius being the Standard-bearer to that Legion thus bespeak them, hitherto, Fellow-Soldiers, I have carried the Standard before you in this secular war, but it is not unto these arms that I am now to invite you, it is not unto these wars that I now excite your va­lour, for now we are to practise another kind of wearfare; for with these wea­pons ye can never enforce your way into the kingdom of heaven. And by & by he sends this Message to the Emperor, Against thee, O Caesar, Desperation it self ( which usually makes even Cowards valiant) cannot prevail with us to take arms. Behold, we have our weapons fixt, yet will we not resist; because we chuse rather to be killed by thee than to overcome thee, and to dye innocents, than to live rebels to either God or thee. And a little after he adds, Tela projici­mus [Page 42] &c. We abandon our arms, O Emperour, & will meet thy messengers of death with naked breasts, yet with hearts strongly munited with Christian Faith. And presently after followed that general Massacre of the Thebean Band, whereof Eutherius gives this Narrative, It was neither their Inno­cence nor their Numbers, that could exempt them from death, whereas in other more dangerous tumults, a multitude though offending, are rarely punished. The same story in the old Martyrology we find thus recorded, They were every where wounded with swords, yet they cryed not out, but disdaining the use of their Arms, they exposed their breasts naked to their persecutors: It was nei­ther their numbers nor their experience in war, that could perswade them to as­sert the equity of their cause by their swords, but placing His example alwaies before them, who was led to the slaughter dumb, and like a lamb to be sacrificed, opened not his mouth; they also in imitation of Him; like the innocent flock of Christ, suffered themselves to be worried and torn in peices by an herd of perse­cuting wolves. Thus also do the Jews of Alexandria, testifie their innocen­cy before Flacous, We are, as thou seest, unarmed, and yet we are accused un­to thee as publick enemies to the state; these hands which nature hath given us for our defence, we have caused to be pinnacled behind us, where they are of lit­tle use, & our breasts we expose naked to every man that hath a mind to kill us. And when the Emperor Valens, cruelly persecuted those Christians, which according to the Holy Scriptures, & the Traditions of the Ancient Fathers, profest Christ to be [...], that is, Co-essential with the Fa­ther; though there were every where great Multitudes of them, yet did they never attempt by arms to secure themselves. Surely, wheresoever Patience in times of persecution is commended unto us, there we find Christ's own example held out unto us (as we read it was to the Thebean Legion) for our imitation. As therefore His patience, so ours, should have no bounds nor limits but death it self. And he that thus loseth his life, is truly said by Christ Himself to find it.

Secondly. These measures could never better our Condition, nor redress our Grievances, unless we should be so vain to imagine our selves capa­ble of waging war with the Crown of England, and all its Allies. Is the KING so petty and inconsiderable a Prince that He should be forced? Or can we think that the noise of our. Thousands and Ten Thousands will frighten Him into a Compliance? Without doubt if we do, we shall too too late find our mistake, and a woful experience will quickly teach us, that the sole want of Their Majesties Protection, will in a very short time reduce us to the most miserable & deplorable condition in the world.

[Page 43] But perhaps we may fancy that this action of ours hath exremely obli­ged Them, and that all things now are become justly due to the merits of our services: 'twill do very well if it be so understood, but I cannot see the least probability of such a Construction; for we have sufficiently manifested in our Declaration, that Self-interest was the first and principal motive to our Undertaking, and our Progress doth plainly demonstrate, that we have only made use of Their Names, the better to effect our own Designs; whilest every thing that hath any Relation to Them, lies neglected & unregarded, without any recognition of Their Authority o­ver these Dominions, or the least Acknowledgment of our Submission to such orders as should come from Them; saving what particularly related to some few ill men (as we call them) whom we have imprisoned & detain­ed without any Law or Reason; so that we have rashly & imprudently ad­ventur'd our All upon a chance, (not an equal one) whether it will be well, or ill taken: if well, we can expect nothing more than what we should have had by sitting still & quiet, unless it be a vast Charge, Trou­ble & Expence, which we have inevitably brought upon our selves: if ill, what will be the Event?

In the first place our Countrey, which hath been so remarkable for the true Profession and pure Exercise of the Protestant Religion, will be ter­med a Land full of Hypocrisie, REBELLION, Irreligion, and what not, and we our selves a degenerate, wicked people, that have fallen from the practises of our Fore-fathers, and the purity of our first principles.

2. In all our Pamphlets and Discourses, we have so magnified our Act­ion, and boasted of the vast numbers we can bring into the Field, that it must be of great import to the Crown of England to curb us & in time to reduce us to our former obedience; & no body will imagine it consistent with the interest of that Crown, any more to trust Government in the hands of a people, so ready & so able upon all occasions to set up for themselves, and the stronger we are, the more need there will be to keep us under.

3. And lastly, We shall realy endure and undergo all those Miseries & Calamities which we fancied to our selves under the late Government; and become the Scorn and By-word of all our Neighbours.

What then remains, but that whilst it is yet called today, we should endeavour to settle our selves in such a Posture, as may at least mitigate, if not wholly prevent the before-mentioned inconveniences. If our Charter be re­stored such a Condition cannot hurt us; but the want of it may; for we are accountable for every Action & every false Step we make after the date of it, & render our selves lyable to be Questioned & Quo-Warranto'd for [Page 44] our Male-feazance whensoever the Supream Authority shall think it [...] if not, it must be of great service to us to be found in a submissive and humble posture, fit & ready to receive Their Majesties Commands; lest while we value our selves too much, upon our own merits, we become un­worthy of Their Favour in a most gracious pardon, without which (think what we will) we never can be safe & secure from the severity of the Laws, which we have indisputably violated, in matters of the high­est nature & consequence imaginable.

I hope every good man will seriously & impartially consider the fore going Discourse, and suffer himself to be guided by the Dictates of Rea­son, and not of Humour or Prejudice, and then I am well assured, it will be evident enough, that we have mistaken our Measures, and that a time­ly recess, will more Advantage us than an obstinate and wilful perseve­rance & that nothing but such a Remedy can restore our almost-perishing & undone Countrey, to a lasting Peace and happy Settlement: Which that GOD of His mercy would grant us, shall ever be the hearty pray­ers of