THE Matter now propounded is of marvellous Weight and Consequence, wherein are two Points chiefly to be considered; The First, Whether King Richard be sufficiently put out of His Throne? The Second, Whether the Duke of Lancaster be lawfully taken in? For the First, how can that be suf­ficiently done, when there is no Power sufficient to do it? The Parliament cannot, for of the Parliament the King is the Head, and can the Body put down the Head? You will say, but the Head may bow it self down, and so may the King re­sign: It is true, but what force is in that which is done by force, and who knows not that King Richard's Resignation was no other? But should we suppose he was sufficiently out, yet how comes the Duke of Lancaster to be lawfully in? If you say by Conquest, you speak Treason, for what Conquest without Arms; and can a Subject lawfully take Arms against his lawful Sovereign, and not be Treason? No, if you say by Election of the State, you speak not Reason, for what Power has the State to elect while any is living that has right to succeed? but such a Successor is not the the Duke of Lancaster, &c. Silent leges inter Ar­ma. What disputing of Titles against the present stream of Power? But however it is ex­ [...]reme injustice that King Richard should be condemned without being heard, or once al­low'd to make his defence. And now, my Lords, I have spoken this at this time, that you may consider of it before it is too late, for as yet it is in your power to undo that justly, which you have unjustly done.

This Speech was uttered in the Lords House in Parliament in the beginning of Henry the Fourth's time, who was the first of the Line of Lancaster that usurped this Crown of England: And it was hoped by all good Men, (that have any regard to a fair Reputation in this World, or that believe there will be a Day of reckoning in the World to come) that we should never have seen such lewd and villanous Actions repeated in our Age, as to make the fore going Speech so necssary to be perused and examined again in these our Days; but since the contrary is too apparent, it will behove every Person of this Nation seriously to consider of these two things; first, Whether the sustance and matter contained in this Speech be true, honest and just, or no? and if it be resolved in the Affirmative, then second­ly, Whether in honest Policy and Prudence we ought to follow this advice, for the securing the publick quiet and peace of this Nation.

As to the former point, a Word or two shall be only said, not so much to inform as to put People in remembrance upon these following Heads, what the Word of God obligeth us to in this matter, what the Doctrines of the Church of England teach; and lastly, what the known Laws and Statutes of this Realm declare in this business upon every of these Heads, multitudes of Quotations might easily be produced, but one or two upon each shall suffice. As to the first, the Scripture says in express terms, That Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft; now consider, in what words could God Almighty shew a higher Detestation of this damnable sin of Rebellion, than by this Similitude; for as the Compact made BETWEEN [Page 2] THE DEVIL and the Witch, is a Combination to abdicate and desert God, and to dethrone him of the Sovereign Power, that he by natural Right of Creation has over his Creatures; so Rebellion, says this unerring holy Spirit, is as this sin of Witchcraft, which designs to dethrone God's Vicegerent, our lawful King, whom he has placed over us. If this be the Word of God, how can any Person be so impudent as to say that Rebellion is not a damning Sin? and since we know also that Lucifer was the first Rebel. As to the second Head, most English-men do communicate in the Church of Eng­land, or to qualifie them have communicated therein, and thereby are Members thereof: Now surely every good Christian must believe that Church to be the best and most con­formable to the Word of God, that he voluntary communicates in, and is a Member of: If she is the best Church in our belief, then we do also believe her Doctrines to be true and agreeable to God's Word, for if any of her Doctrines be false in our Opinion, then we cannot believe her to be the best Church, and so must renounce her Communion, and seek some other: Now our Church of England does abhor that damnable Doctrine of the Jesuits own Invention, viz. That [...] or upon pretence of Religion may fight against and depose their lawful Sovereign. Now I dare affirm not any ten of their other Tenets has made them so hateful to all good Men, as this pernicious one; now shall we abhor them so exceedingly for this deposing Doctrine, and yet practice the same our selves, then certainly we must for the future either hate our selves, or else take those Jesuits and em­brace them in our bosoms; for we are and must be accounted the Disciples and Followers of those Masters, whose Rules and Precepts we put in practice. And if any body doubts whether the Church of England declares Rebellion against their lawful Prince to be a dam­ning Sin, upon any account whatsoever, nay, tho they be evil Princes, let him read her Homi­ly against Rebellion, which consists of six parts, all which are full and express in this matter.

Now let us see what the Statutes of this Realm declare the antient and present Law to be, as what is Rebellion, which is so great a Sin by the express Word of God.

The famous Statute of the 25th Edw. 3. Cap. 2. says expresly thus. If any Man do levy War against our Lord the King in his Realm, or be adherent to the King's Enemies in his Realm, giving them Aid and Comfort in the Realm or elsewhere, are guilty of High Treason: And sure they that came to take the King's Crown, are his Enemies with a witness, as the Duke of Lancaster did, against whom this Speech is directed: So now, 'tis very plain, that as Rebellion is a damnable Sin, so our Law shews what Rebellion is. Then let us examin whether by our Laws we may in any case Rebel, or take up Arms against our Prince; and for this peruse the Statute of 13 Car. 2. Cap. 1. which obligeth all Persons in Corporations to take this following Oath: I A. B. do declare and believe that it is not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever, to take Arms against the King, and that I do abhor that traiterous position of taking Arms by his Authority against his Person, or against those that are commissioned by him: So help me God. Now though the obligation to take this Oath is not universal upon every Subject, yet the substance and matter of it is undoubted Law, viz. That it is a trai­terous position upon any pretence whatsoever to take up Arms against our Prince, or those commis­sioned by him. If this be undoubtedly the Law, as it is, let us act according to the Law, who have been so angry with others because they did contrary to Law; and th [...] Maxim has been allowed in all Ages to be true, that it is a presumption in any Person or in any number of private Men, to think themselves wiser than the Law.

And now let it be maturely considered whether it had not been well for this King­dom, if the Advice given in this Speech had been followed; for who is ignorant, that knows any thing of our History, of the many thousand Lives that were lost in the bloody dispute for the Crown, between the Houses of York and Lancaster; more English Blood was spent in this unnatural War, than in twice Conquering the Kingdom of France; they that compute the least, say it cost above one Hundred Thousand Lives. Ah! How dismal a Scene does this represent to our view, that have any true and sober Love for our native Country and Country-men; and how likely we are to come to the same pass again, of one Brother killing the other, and the Son his Father, let every Man of sense be judg. If we neglect the opportunity we now have, to re-settle us again upon the foundations of our known Laws; our Children, nay, our Childrens Children may be bound to curse our head-strong Humor, that made us so like the deaf Adder, as to stop our Ears to the voice of the Charmer; that is, the word of God, and the Laws of our Land. I shall only remark this one thing to all sober English Men, That there is not one Instance in all our History of almost these Thousand Years last past, that that Family which were known to have the Right of the Crown by lawful descent, were ever deprived of it totally. It is true, that Force and nominal Acts of Parliament made by Kings de facto, have deposed particular Persons that had the lawful Right to the Crown; but yet, always Right overcame Might at the last, and Peace was never firmly settled until the right Heir repossessed the Throne.