BEfore we proceed to Treat of Government in the rise and growth, it will not be needless to give our definition of it, as we think fit enough to the na­ture of the thing: We define it therefore a volun­tary submission, when one or more rule, and others willingly obey (by which we distinguish it from Tyranny, of which more hereafter) for the end of all Government, it Sa­lus Populi, there being, as saith Cicero, a natural instinct in all Men and Beasts to conserve themselves, and to shun those things that are destructive: Now that this may be the easier done, Nature seeks Union; for all Union preserves, but dis­cord and disjunction kills: And Solomon says, that two are better then one, for if one fall, the other shall help him up: And Aristotle says in his Book De Repub. That man by nature is Civi­le Animal: And therefore the same Author saith, That he that is a Member of no City, is either a notorious Rogue, or better then a Man: To which agrees Cains punishment, to be a wan­derer and a vagabond, which he said was to heavy for him to bear; and those in the Hebrews, who wandred about in sheep-skins and goat-skins, of whom the world was not worthy. The first age we confess dwelt apart, and lived vicati [...]; as al­so it is said of the Athenians, that they lived like Beasts in [Page 6] holes, till by Government they were civilized: Now for the preserving of mutual entercourse between man and man; Na­ture, who doth nothing in vain, endued man with a reasonable Soul, and discursive faculty or speech, by which he might sig­nifie to his fellow Creatures, both joy and gladness, and also bewail his misery: He hath made him also to distinguish be­twixt good and evil, just and unjust, and that not upon con­straint, but by an innate Principle, by a Law written in his heart: But after that God had Created man a living soul, he forget­ting that duty of his Creation, increased in wickedness; so that it was necessary for the conservation of the whole, that this vast body might have some head to rule it, and something that might be as a rule just and right to be governed by. Now this Government admits of several divisions, and several names: For certain it is, that the first Image of Government that ever was, hath been betwixt Father and Family: For as much as those things that are simple, are before Aggregates; and therefore Aristotle first speaks of a House, as being the part of a City, and then of a City.

A House consists of two parts, Servants, and Children; A Servant is nothing else but a living possession, one who hath given up himself to the disposing of another, and is as an in­strument in the hand of his Master, who doth with him what he pleaseth, save onely that which the Law of Nature, and the Law of the State wherein we live forbid. How this came a­bout, and whether God at first Created men alike, and whe­ther men put themselves first into this condition, we will not now dispute; yet its probable by nature all men are alike free, and that either Tyranny made first slaves, or else happily some having spent their Talent, and being ashamed to beg, put them­selves into anothers possession, though Aristotle saith, Some men are born to serve: Sure it is, that to command, and to be commanded, are not onely necessary, but also useful; for we see that in our selves, that consist of soul and body; the soul commands, and the body as Servant obeys, yea, the very Hea­then had this notion; and that as some think, from the sight of the goodly universe, or in imitation of the Celestial Deity: For seeing all things so fitly moved, they knew it could not be [Page 7] but by some kinde of Government; whereupon some think there was a certain kinde of Government among the gods, Ju­piter being so often stiled King, but yet for the favorableness of his Scepter, stiled by Homer, the Father of gods and men. Now as we said before, it is evident that the state of a Servant is sla­very, because that some that have been of Ingenuous Parents are compelled to it: And that which is natural to men; viz. Freedom, is so often fought for. Hence it is that we Read of the Servile Bellum, of the Scythians and Romans. Now Servants are either such as have voluntarily put themselves on it, or else are such by Law, by which it is established that those that are taken by War, are the spoils of the Conquerers; whence some are called Mancipia, Quasi Manu Capta: And such is the power of the Master over his servants, that the Scythians being gone over the Seas,Iustin. Hist. and their Servants Re­belling, they came to them with no other weapons but whips in their hands, a manifest token of their Servants subjection. The second part of a house are children, the power of the father over them, is the same that a King hath over his people; and as a King is to provide for the good of his people, so the fa­ther for his children, till they be able to provide for themselves, which is the very instinct of Nature in all Creatures to provide for their yong, till they can pick their own meat. Such was the power of the father in Liberos, that the Romans had power over their childrens lives; examples hereof are exceed­ing many, and some think paralel'd in Abrahams offering Isaac, and Jephtha's Vow: To put bounds to this power, it is not our intent, onely this we will say, which is granted by all (and which shews all power limited) that the Son is not to obey the Father in all things: The grounds of this is in the Jewish Law, and holds true by the Law of Nature; for if one should be commanded by his Parents to sacrifice to Idols, or the like, he is in no wise to obey him, it being contrary to an express Command: Now though obedience is better then sacrifice, yet it bindes not contrary to a Command; for in case the Magistrate should command one thing, Parents another, we demand which is to be obeyed, since the Scripture is express for both: There is reported in the Rabbines a pretty conceit; [Page 8] A Boy was commanded by his Mother, to take a nest of Birds with the Dam, the Law forbids it; the Boy assaying to break the Law in the obedience of his Parent, broke his neck; what a King is in his City, that a Father is in his House: And as King­ly Power is continued by the obedince of Subjects, so is an House; For if a House be divided against it self, it cannot stand: And he that will learn to govern well, and be a Mem­ber profitable to his City, must learn first to rule his own House, which is a part of it. And now we come to Cities; The ge­neral forms of Government, we shall onely name them; it being our intent onely to speak of Government in its self, not in this or that, which is onely accidental, and not essential; though some States stand best by one, some by another: The usual forms are, first, Aristocratical, where men of the great­est Parts and Trust, are singled out for the good of others: Much like the States in Holland: and these gathered out of every county, and assembled together, seem to us to carry the true notion of a Parliament, the Commons being a representative body. The second is Democratical, when the people have a voyce in all that is done: Not much unlike this, was the Tribu­nus plebis among the Romans, who suffered the Senate to do nothing without Rogation of the people; and they had power to choose Consuls, and to Enact Laws, which were therefore called, Plebiscita. The third, is Monarchical, when one hath sole command: concerning this, though it be very ancient, and the common opinion be, that in Nimrod or Belus, Father to Ninus, the first Monarchy began after the Flood; yet its probable there were Kings before him: For besides that Cains building of a City, and denominating it from his Son Enoch, seems to have the Character of a Kingdom in it; yet some make Adam the first King, and that Seth succeeded in his Kingdom: And the Letter of Alexander to Aristotle, in Joseph-Ben-Gorion tells us, that Kenon the Son of Enoch, Grand-childe to Seth, was Emperor over the whole world, and buried in an Island of the East-Indian Sea; yea, some would have Monarchy derived from the very Law of Nature, and that Man as a Civil Creature was directed to this form, to which they bring that of Justin. In the beginning, the com­mand [Page 9] was with the Kings, whom no popular Ambition, but Spectata inter b [...]s moderatio exalted to it. And Homer saith, that one King is best; notwithstanding, to speak the truth, for all that can be said of Monarchy, we think that no one Go­vernment is more suitable to the nature of a man then ano­ther, it being contrary to men to be in subjection, if they can avoid it; if any, that which is most conservative, which would be disputed: This onely we will say, That in the multitude of Counsellors, there is wisdom. And the first disorder of Go­vernment in Scripture was in Saul, a King. The fourth form, concerning which we shall speak a word, because that now adays men argue from that to ours, is the Jewish policy, which Josephus and all Writers confess to be a Theocratia, or a State mediately governed by God: For we put the case thus, and we say, That they could do nothing but by express command from God, whether in Peace or War, (not to speak of the Ʋrim and Thummim, Typical of Gods presence, who is both Light and Truth) they, we say, have their Government immediately from God: For its proper to Nations that are sui Juris, to make War and Peace, as we see in the Romans, and all others: But the Jews could not make either War or Peace with any Nation, but by an immediate inquiry, which when they neg­lected, how often did it prove their destruction? And how often do we read in holy Writ, of asking counsel of God, and of doing nothing without him? Secondly, those that had their Magistrates and their Laws from God, their Government is of God: But the Jews had their Magistrates, Judges, and Kings from God, yea their Laws, which are so often called The Book of the Law of the Lord. Now the Constitution of a Common-wealth being nothing but Heads, and Laws, it followeth, that they who had those two from God, and could not Enact Laws, or Establish Governors by a Power seated in themselves, had the Fundamental Constitution of their Republique from God. Although it be otherwise in other Nations,A digression concerning the end of Magistracy. in which we suppose the Power is fundamentally seated in the People (as will be said) for whose good it was first instituted: For when Res Publica comes to be Res Privata, it ceases to be a Commonwealth, and is then Tyranny: The judg­ment [Page 10] of the Israelites was to be without Magistrates, or else to have foolish Magistrates who knew no good but their own, whereas they should be common Parents, consulting not for themselves but for their People, wherefore they are com­pared to Shepherds: And those that feed Israel in Scripture, are as well Magistrates, as Ministers: Plato in his Repub: in di­vers places keeps this similitude: A Shepherd, he saith, (speaking of Governors) cares for nothing, but that he may keep what is committed to his care; the same saith, all Government (quatenus Government) commands us to take care for no other thing, but what is committed to our charge: And therefore Plu­tarch saith, That it behoveth a Prince first to govern himself, and then to govern his Subjects; for he that knows no order, cannot order others; the same would have them to consider, that they themselves are subject to Command: Not like the King of Persia, who made all Slaves but his Wife, and there­fore the Law is to be his rule, the King of men and gods, saith Pindar: Not so much that written in Books or Tables, but viva in corderatio, always dwelling, always watching with him; and therefore the King was to have the Law continually read to him: And it may be the cause why so much sin in Israel, was, because the Law was lost and not found, or at least not used till Josiah, at which time there was great joy for the finding of it, and the King read in it from Morn­ing until Evening: Not much unlike this is that of the Per­sian King, who had one to come to him every Morning with these words, Rise O King, Care for those things which Oro­masdes would have you care for: They are called Ministers of God (yea gods) to preserve mens Estate, and what nature hath bestowed upon them, to distribute it and preserve it: And there­fore at first, the Romans had onely their Senatus which con­sisted of old men, best able to judge of things, being experi­enced in the affairs of this world: Concerning this, Plutarch hath wrote a Book, in which is elegantly discussed who are fitter for the Commonwealth, youths, or old men; for we know that Rehoboams yong men made the Tribes fall off: The yoke of Tyranny being insufferable, and therefore upon due consideration and power to be cast off; for who is ignorant [Page 11] that the first Power entrusted was but small, and no more, then if a blinde man should entrust a seeing friend with his leading, and he contrary to his Trust, should either attempt a murther, or else a throw from some preoipice: we say, that if this man should receive his sight; he may then cast him off, for that he desired him to lead him, not to throw him down. Now having said something of Government in general, as also of the de­clination of it, we shall proceed to that which indeed is no­thing else but the abuse of it, and that is Tyranny, or an unli­mited and usurped Power, by which one man, or more, without an Appeal to the Law of Nature, written in the heart of every man, or to that Divine written Law of God, entrench upon (by freely exercising) the Natural or Political Rights of others, according to their own pleasure: It is a Power meerly Arbi­trary, which is so far from coming under the notion of Jus Divinum, as it is altogether Repugnant to the Law of Reason and Nature; neither of them allowing the private Interest of a part, to exalt it self above the common good of the whole; whence comes the ruine of a body Natural? but from the su­perabounding, unlimited and Tyrannical Power, of some one of the Malignant humors: As Sampsons strength lay in his Locks, so that of a State lies in the Complication of an universal Interest, common unto all; we shall speak of Tyran­ny under a twofold account: 1. There may be Tyranny by Con­quest, as those that know any thing in History, know that the foundation upon which the first four Monarchies was built, was an usurped Power, got by the Sword: For indeed, the world being enlarged, and the estate of the people confused, it was then a fit time for Tyranny to take its original; every one being a Law to himself, and Interpreter of his own Actions, no marvel that the strongest governed all the rest at his own will: If this principle of Tyranny be good, other men may not onely free themselves from slavery as soon as they can, but also exercise power (when its put into their hands) against Ty­rants, their former oppressors; it will amount but to Lex tali­onis, to pay them home in their own Coyn, from their own Principles. 2. Tyranny may be by Male-Administration, or by abusing and going beyond the Trust reposed in a man, by a [Page 12] Kingdom or State: The present age in which we live, presents before our eyes an example most fresh and lively; That our late King, Charls Stuart, was not a Tyrant in the first sence, is confessed by all, witness his Oath at his Coronation, as also his claiming Interest in the Crown, by a lineal descent from William the Conquerer, who thought the choice or Election of the People, a better and surer Title then Conquest: But to free him from Tyranny in the latter sence, who can? unless spi­rits wilfully prejudiced against the Honorable Parliament, and the High and Supreme Court of Justice; for that he was en­trusted by the People with his power, is clear, it being irra­tional to think that our Ancestors gave any such absolute unlimitted Power unto our late Kings Predecessors, as that they might use them how they pleased; and notwithstanding, that no reserve left in people, when as the exercise of Govern­ment, the bestowing it upon one or many, is founded in the consent and mutual agreement of the whole body, or society of men in a State-Government or Magistracy, is indeed a power ordained of God, and upon no pretence to be resisted: but when a man through depraved Principles of Tyranny and Oppres­sion, usurps over the Conscience in things Spiritual and Divine, above the reach or determination of the Spirit of a man, by proposing his will and fancy to them for a Law, or when he entrenches upon Natural or Civil Right, then he loseth the no­tion of a Magistrate, because he goes contrary to the end of the Government of that Fundamental Law, which is Salus Populi: But suppose our Forefathers had given away to any one man without a remedy or appeal, that power originally in them by way of dispensation, it will not follow, seeing nature makes us free, and this freedom never given away by us, we should be bound to embrace any slavery our Forefathers should seemingly cast us in, they could only engage for themselvs, they had nothing to do with their Posterity, as to take from us what Nature gives: Now that Charls Stuart broke this Trust, which we have shewed he must necessarily be intrusted with, we shall not need to spend time in the probation of, it being abundantly proved by many learned Pens, we shall proceed to shew the lawfulness, for Free-born men in a State, according to [Page 13] that Fundamental Law of Reason, to execute Justice upon a man degenerated into Tyranny: In doing this, we shall not spend time to Treat of the several names and kindes of Go­vernment, we having spoken somewhat of them before, yet this we would put you in minde of, That Theocracy was onely of Divine institution, and that this was onely proper to the Jews: As for the rest, they are of humane institution, and are derived from the People; and the people have power to put down, or to alter these or any of these as they finde occasion; seeing it is confessed by all, that Salus Populi est Suprema Lex, All Governors are but Trustees unto the People: And there­fore when the people finde them acting contrary to the Trust reposed in them, they may justly take it from them, and com­mit to others; or in case they cannot finde others that they can entrust, or in case they finde that Government inconve­nient for the State, they may alter it, and keep the Trust in their own hands: But we know that there are many, who deny the Supreme Power to be in the people; and those men make it Haereditary to Kings and their Successors, and that by vertue of the Laws of this Nation. But concerning the first, we would have them see from whence this Succession did proceed; There could not be a Succession before there was an Election; and if so, then either the first King must have this power in himself, or receive it from the people: Now we suppose that no men are so absurd, as to affirm it was in the first King, before he re­ceived the Crown and Power from the people; and if so, then the prime and chief Power must necessarily be in the Peo­ple: If Kings obtain Crowns and Kingdoms any other way, it must be by Conquest; and if that be a sufficient Title, then if the great Turk should invade our Kingdom, we must ne­cessarily own him as our lawful Soveraign; and if any private man by force can beat another out of his possession, he may lawfully enjoy it, and he to whom it did of right belong, must acquiesce, and not seek to regain it. But there are some that say it is not our case for we have had a Succession of kings ac­cording to the Laws of this Nation, for divers Generations: But we desire to know of them, by whom those Laws were En­acted; as also, who the first king was, from whence this Suc­cession [Page 14] did proceed: And as for this first king, which was the main Basis or stock from whence this Succession took its rise, It was William, sirnamed Bastard, Duke of Normandy, who invaded this Land, and destroyed many of the Free-born English: We shall not spend time to dispute what Title he pre­tended he had to the Crown: But this onely we shall say, If he had any Interest, it could be but a weak one, seeing he was an illegitimate: We shall rather speak of the Arbitrary and Tyrannical Government he exercised on the Free-born English, as soon as he had invaded this Nation, and obtained the Crown: How he subverted their Laws, and by force En­acted and put in Execution such as were most suitable to his own Tyrannical Spirit, to the great dislike and male-content of the people; Though they were constrained to submit unto them, as appears by the several insurrections of the English, both of the Nobility and Commonalty, who several times endeavored to throw his servile yoke off their shoulders: Amongst whom Edgar Ethling was chief leader, who also is reported to have had the greatest interest in the Crown, with whom joyned Edwin and Morcar, who were brethren of the Queen.

We shall not stand to tell you of the multitudes slain in divers places, nor of his unjust acting in particulars; Though History makes it plainly appear, That in a Bloody and Barba­rous maner, he dismembred many, put out the eyes of some, and slow many hundreds which were at his mercy: Onely this we will say of him in general, He came in a Conquerer, and lived a Tyrant; but it was not our intent to have spoken any thing concerning him, onely this we thought good briefly to discover, the stock from whence this Regal Succession did spring. We shall not speak any thing of the Tyranny of his Successors, nor how far they walked in his wicked steps, but shall pass all over in silence, until the unhappy Reign of Charls Stuart, who came unto the Crown after the death of king James his Father, his Brother Henry being before poysoned: We shall not here stand to reckon up the Capital crimes which were committed by him in the beginning and middle of his Raign; neither shall we undertake to determine how far he [Page 15] countenanced the Spanish Faction; neither shall we intermed­dle with the transactions of Ree, Rochel, &c. But we shall ra­ther descend to the last seven years of his Raign, and here we could declare sufficiently the horrid impieties and bloody slaughters committed by him: But seeing the illegality of his proceedings is sufficiently proved, and so fully made manifest to all the world, we shall not spend time to dispute of it, see­ing all men, unless wilfully blinde, may read it [...]n bloody Cha­racters; but we shall rather speak something concerning the justness of the Parliaments proceedings against him: It be­ing apparent he degenerated from a king unto a Tyrant, it was not unjust for them to Act against him, as a Tyrant; now all rational men acknowledge it a just act to execute a Tyrant: But the difference amongst them is, By whom he should be ex­ecuted? Whether by a Native? or Stranger? or for any man without Judgement? or else whether it must be done by some Court of Judicature? and to this last most men agree: We read of Nero & Maximinus, how they were both executed by the power and command of the Roman Senate: And likewise divers of the kings of Denmark, for Tyranny have been Ba­nished, Imprisoned and Executed; so odious is Tyranny to all men, that the very Heathens, when Hercules had subdued Ty­rants, they numbred him among the gods: And in our Neighbor Nation of Scotland, the Lord President of the High Court of Judicature, hath given a very large example, and therefore we shall pass that by.

But if we had had no president, either Domestick or Forraign, yet the very Law of Reason and Nature, were sufficient to clear them in it: As for the Laws of the Land, they are all subordinate unto this of Reason, and must give place to it: And seeing kings have always had a Negative Voyce, which they have kept up by usurpation, it is not to be expected the letter of the Law should so fully speak to their particulars: There­fore we cannot but acknowledge, that we are abundantly satis­fied, in the justness of their proceedings in the Tryal, Con­demnation and Execution of Charls Stuart. Now seeing Go­vernment is so necessary (as we have already declared) and Tyranny taken away by Gods blessing, and the endeavors of [Page 16] our Honorable Parliament, and Renowned Army: Our earnest desire is, That God would direct and enable them to settle a Government, that all men, especially those that are in places of Trust, as well in Universities as elsewhere, may be compelled to acknowledge the Supreme Power of Parliament, which they have received, and are entrusted with by the people of Eng­land, that we may have cause to rejoyce in them, and to bless God for them, and as long as they shall thus Act according to their Trust, we shall not cease to be their faithful and affecti­onate Servants, to the utmost of our powers.

WE had thought, that such had been the Equity of our Parliaments proceedings, and so manifest to all the seeing world, that even Envy her self would have been silenced; but we had delivered to us a Paper, Entituled as is mentioned; which Pa­per, though it came to our hands like an old Almanack, bearing date from before the death of him, whom you stiled, Your Dread Soveraign, yet we could not pass it over, without shew­ing you how far you have out stript-your Classical bounds. As for the particulars in the Book, having perused it, we finde neither good Reason, nor good Arguing; yet nevertheless, we will single out two or three, to which we will briefly Answer.

Whereas you instance in the prophanation of your Cove­nant and Oathes, we Demand,

1. How far Oathes and Covenants are obligatory?

2. We ask, what you meant by entring into Oathes and [Page 16] [...] [Page 17] [...] [Page 18] Covenants, of Restoring Charls Stauart, and Reforming Re­ligion? As to the first, we say, That some Oathes and Cove­nants are not to be made, and if inconsideratey made, con­sideratey broken; for we know, that more then forty of the Jews bound themselves by Oath, Not to eat nor drink till they had killed Paul.

As to the second we make some Quaeres:

• 1. Whether the Covenant to restore the King, was with­out any condition? If so, it was unlawful; for to instance in a Simile, Suppose a man should ingage himself to another, to defend and protect him from all violence; put case that person violate the Laws of the Land, and is therefore condemned to dye, that mans Oath bindes him not (yea cannot) to pro­tect him.
• 2. If your Covenant had a condition, whether to restore the King to his Throne, without reference to the peoples Liberty; if so, its all one, as if you should engage your selves in slavery, and your actions differed nothing from the Cavaliers, whose ultimate end it was, to restore the King unto his Throne, with­out any satisfaction.
• 3. What you meant by the Reformation according to the Word of God? whether the imposal of an outward Form, to which all men should be forced to give an assent? if so, you drive at nothing else but the Popish and Prelatical Confor­mity.
• 4. Whether all have equal light, or see with the same eyes? if not, while should any be compelled outwardly to profess that, which inwardly they never knew?
• 5. Whether the Reformation of Religion be not rather Internal and Spiritual, then the imposing of any External Form of Government?
• 6. Whether Christ is not the alone King of the Common­wealth of Israel? if so, then the Reformation is wholly car­ried on by his Spirit.
• 7 Whether the Magistrate, as a Subordinate Reformer, hath any thing to do with the Church, but to preserve them from injuries as men.
• 8. What is the Toleration which you say is no way conso­nant [Page 19] to the Word of God? if Christian liberty, we dissent.
• 9. We demand, whether you hold perfection in this life? if so, why speak you and write contrary to your principles? if not, why account you all erroneous that dissent from you?
• 10. Whether the Results of any Assembly, in matters of Faith and Conscience, are obligatory? if so, they must be infallible, and then we demand whence they had their infallibility.
• 11. Whether the interpretations of Scripture, made by any Assembly, hath as much Jus Divinum as the Scripture it self?

To all which Quaeres we should gladly receive particular satisfaction.

We likewise finde you in your Paper, urging Statute Law; we thought you had been Dispencers of the Gospel, and not Expounders of the Law; Lecturers, not Barristers; Countrey Ministers, not Inns of Court Gentlemen: You say, you are informed by Law, that the King could do no wrong; surely it was out of some of Judge Ienkins his Papers; as for your reading it in Parliament Declarations, we conceive it was in Mecurius Aulicus, whom you took for the Moderate Intelli­gencer. We likewise finde you too much intrenching upon the Authority of the Magistrates, advising his Excellency not to meddle, without direction from the Assembly. Unless we are mistaken, this borders upon Popery, which commands no­thing to be done in State, without the Assent of Ecclesiastique persons. For your better satisfaction, we will give you the Popes own words, as we finde them in a Bull written to Philip the fair King of France, mentioned in the French History; the words are these, Boniface Bishop, Servant of the Servants of God, to Philip King of Frenchmen, Fear God, observe his Com­mandments; we will thee to understand, That thou art subject to us both in Spiritual and Temporal things.

We likewise finde you stiling your selves Watchmen and Seers: If Watchmen, we advise you to have a care that you give us no more false Alarums, for fear of Martial Law; and as you are Seers, we desire you to keep in minde, That the Seers of Israel have oftentimes been blinde.