Page images

making or not making of any law; but to take that for jult and good legally, which is there decreed, and to see it executed accordingly. Nor was he fet over us to . vie wisdom with his parliament, but to be guided by them; any of whom possibly may as far excel hiin in the gift of wisdom, as he them in place and dignity. But much nearer is it to impoffibility, that any king alone should be wiler than all his council; fure enough it was not he, though no king ever before him so much contended to have it thought fo. And if the parliament to thought not, but defired him to follow their advice and deliberation in things of public concernment, he accounts it the fame propofition, as if Sampton had been moved “ to the putting out his eyes, that the Philistines might abule him.” And thus out of an unwife or pretended fear, left others thould make a scorn of him for yielding to his parliament, he regards not to give cause of worte fulpicion, that he made a scorn of his regal oath.

But “ to exclude him from all power of denial feems an arrogance;" in the parliament he means : what in him then to deny against the parliament? None at all, by what he argues: for “ by petitioning, they confess their inferiority, and that obliges them to reft, if not latisfied; yet quieted with such an antwer as the will and reason of their fuperior thinks fit to give.” First, petitioning, in better English, is no more than requesting or requiring; and inen require not favours only, but their due; and that not only from fuperiors, but from equals, and inferiors also. The noblett Romans, when they stood for that which was a kind of regal honour, the consulthip, were wont in a submissive manner to go about, and beg that higheti dignity of the meanett plebeians, naining them inau by man; which in their tongue was called petitio contulatus. And the parliament of England petitioned the king, noi because all of them were inferior to liim, but becaute he was infcrior to any one of them, which they did of civil cufion, and for fathion's fake, more than of duty; for by plain law cited before, the parliament is his fuperior.

But what law in any trial or dispute enjoins a frecman to reft quieted, though not satisfied with the will and



reason of his superior? It were a mad law that would subject reason to fuperiority of place. And if our highest consultations and purpoled laws must be terminated by the king's will, then is the will of one man our law, and no fubtlety of dispute can redeem the parliament and nation from being flaves: neither can any tyrant require more than that his will or reason, though not satisfying, should yet be rested in, and determine all things. We may conclude therefore, that when the parliament petitioned the king, it was but merely form, let it be as “ foolish and absurd” as he pleales. It cannot certainly be fo absurd as what he requirey, that the parliament thould confine their own and all the kingdom's reason to the will of one man, becaule it was his hap to fucceed his father. For neither God nor the laws have subjected us to his will, nor fet his reason to be our sovereign above law (which must needs be, if he can strangle it in the birth) but let his person over us in the sovereign execution of such laws as the parliament establish. The parliament therefore, without any ufurpation, hath had it always in their power to limit and confine the exorbitancy of kings, whether they call it their will, their reafon, or their conscience.

But this above all was never expected, nor is to be endured, that a king, who is bound by law and oath to follow the advice of his parliament, should be permitted to except against them as “ young statesmen," and proudly to tulpend his following their advice, until his seven years experience had shown biin how well they could govern themselves.” Doubtless the law never fupposed to great an arrogance could be in one man; that he whole feventeen years unexperience had almost ruined all, thould sit another seven years schoolmaster to tutor those who were fent by the whole realm to be his countellors and teachers. And with what modesty can he pretend to be a statesman himself, who with his father's king-craft and his own, did never that of his own accord, which was not directly opposite to his professed interest both at home and abroad; discontenting and alienating his subjects at home, weakening and deferting his confederates abroad, and with them the common cause of religion; so that the whole course of his reign, by an example of his own furnitbing, hath resembled Phaeton more than Phæbus, and forced the parliament to drive like Jehu ; which omen taken from his own mouth, God hath not diverted?

cause ever

And he on the other side might have remembered, that the parliament fit in that body, not as his subjects, but as his fuperiors, called, not by him, but by the law; not only twice every year, but as ofi as great affairs require, to be his countèllors and dictators, though he stomach it; nor to be diffolved at his pleasure, but when all grievances be first removed, all petitions heard and answered. This is not only reason, but the known law of the land.

“ When he heard that propofitions would be fent him," he fat conjecturing what they would propound; and because they propounded what he expected not, he takes that to be a warrant for his denying them. But what did he expect? He expected that the parliament would reinforce “ some old laws.” But if thote laws were not a fufficient remedy to all grievances, nay were found to be grievances themielves, when did we lose that other part of our freedom to establith new ? He thought “ fome injuries done by himself and others to the commonwealth were to be repaired.” But how could that be, while he the chief offender took upon him to be fole judge both of the injury and the reparation? “ He staid till the advantages of his crown considered, might induce him to condescend to the people's good.” When as the crown itself with all tholė advantages were therefore given him, that the people's good thould be first confidered ; not bargained for, and bought by inches with the bribe of more offertures and advantages to his crown. He looked for moderate defires of due reforination;" as if any fuch dofires could be imunoderate. He looked for fuch a reformation “both in church and state, as might preserve” the roots of every grievance and abuse in both still growing (which he calls “ the foundation and effentials") and would have only the excrefcences of evil pruned away for the present, as was plotted before, that they might grow fast enough between triennial parliaments, to hinder them by work enough belides from


ever striking at the root.

He alleges,

They should have had regard to the laws in force, to the wildom and piety of former parliaments, to the ancient and universal practice of christian churches.” As if they who come with full authority to redress public grievances, which ofttiines are laws themtelves, were to have their hands bound by laws in force, or the fuppofition of more piety and wisdom in their ancestors, or the practice of churches heretofore; whose fathers, notwithtianding all these

pretences, macle as vaft alterations to free themselves from ancient popery. For all antiquity that adds or varies from the feripture, is no more warranted to our safe imitation, than what was done the age before at Trent. Nor was there need to have despaired of what could be established in lieu of what was to be annulled, having before his eyes the government of so many churches beyond the feas; whole pregnant and folid reasons wrought do with the parliament, as to desire a uniformity rather with all other protestants, than to be a tchilin divided from them under a conclave of thirty bithops, and a crew of irreligious priests that gaped for the fame preferment.

And whereas he blames those propofitions for not containing what they ought, what did they mention, but to vindicate and restore the rights of parliament invaded by cabin councils, the courts of justice obstructed, and the government of the church innovated and corrupted ? All these things he might easily have observed in them, which he affirms he could not find; but found “thote demanding” in parliament, who were before as factious in the fate, and fchifinatical in the church ; and demanding not only toleration for themselves in their vanity, novelty, and confufion, but alio an extirpation of that government, whose rights they had a mind to invade.” Was this man ever likely to be advifod, who with fuch a prejudice and difeftcem sets himtelfagainst his choten and appointed counsellors? likely ever to admit of reformation, who centures all the government of other protettant churches, as bad as any papitt could have centured them? And what king had ever his whole kingdom in such contempt, fo to wrong


" looked upon and dishonour the free elections of his people, as to judge them, whom the nation thought worthiest to fit with him in parliament, few else but such as were punishable by the laws?" yet knowing that time was, when to be a protestant, to be a chriftian, was by law as punishable as to be a traitor; and that our Saviour himself, coming to reform his church, was acculed of an intent to invade Cæsar's right, as good a right as the prelate bifhops ever had; the one being got by force, the other by spiritual usurpation ; and both by force upheld.

He admires and falls into an extaty, that the parliament should send him such a “horrid proposition,” as the removal of epilcopacy. But expect from him in an extaly no other reasons of his admiration than the dream and tautology of what he hath fo often repeated, law, antiquity, ancettors, prosperity, and the like, which will be therefore not worth a fecond answer, but may pass with his own compariton into the common fewer of other popith arguments.

" Had the two houses sued out their livery from the wardship of tumults,” he could fooner have believed them. It concerned them first to fue out their livery from the unjust wardthip of his encroaching prerogative. And had he also redeemed his overdated minority from a pupilage under bishops, he would much less have mittrusted his parliament; and never would have set fo bale a character upon them, as to count them no better than the vaffals of certain nameless men, whom he charges to be such as “ hunt after faction with their hounds the tumults.” And yet the bishops could have told him, that Nimrod, the firit that hunted after faction, is reputed by ancient tradition the first tiiat founded monarchy; Klience it appears, that to hunt after faction is more properly the king's game; and thote hounds, which he calls the vulgar, have been often hallooed to from court, of whom the mongrel fort have been enticed; the rest have not lost their scent, but understood aright, that the parliament had that part to act, which he had failed in; that trust to discharge, which he had broken ; that ettate and honour to preserve, which was far beyond his, the


« PreviousContinue »