THE JOVIAL TINKER OF ENGLAND: Willing To Hammer the Covenant and Scots Commissioners into English.  
AND To mend the breaches, and stop the holes of the Crown of England, (miserably torn and bruised, both within and without) with the best Mettle he can get. And at a very reasonable Rate.  
PROVIDED, He be not compelled to take the Scots Sense upon the COVENANT. He will rather walk about the Countries, & cry: Have you any work for a Jovial Tinker.  
By BORIALIS Guard.  
LONDON, Printed for John Hickman, 1648.   

THE Covenant, and Scotch Commissioners, translated into English, for better understanding.  
ENGLAND is unhappily become the Tennis-ball of misfortune, betwixt a Scottish King, and the Kingdom of Scots, Epitomised in those State-Merchants their Commissioners. The one striving for an absolute separate interest, the other for a joint. A design in practice ever since King James first set foot over Tweed. wherewith he travelled all his life, but wanting the Midwisery of a Covenant, to bring it to pass; but now we are shared out by the Meere-stones of mutual agreement betwixt His Majesty and His Native Subjects, who formerly promised them three Counties, but that not contenting them, he hath now undertaken for the whole kingdom, to let them play the best of their Game, and they to him for the Crown to make it Independent (whereas the Identity and self-samenesse of interest ought to be 'twixt him and his People, as betwixt the head and body natural) and certainly the cards play fair for them, by the Cavaliers on the one side, and the Londoners on the other, the one sworn slaves to Prerogative, and the other (for the most part) to the Scotch gloss upon the English Covenant, who long to feast the Mayor of Edinburgh at Guildhall. For the Scots finding the waters troubled, and humours stirring, they think now is the best fishing, and the fittest time to work their ends, and therefore Print their papers in spite of the Parliament (in hope thereby to set England on fire that they may come to warm their hands at it) a practice never known in use by any Ministers of State but these, nor by them in no place in the world but here, because their warp is weaving in our Looms. They find the Round heads á stiff people not easily bend, but resolved to the death, to maintain entire both the freedom & interest of England without mixture or thraldom, therefore, Acheronta movebunt, they now renounce brotherhood, and contrary to Covenant fawn upon the Principles of the Cavaliers, face about to the common Enemy, towards whom throughout all these wars they carried themselves very inoffensively, doing them no more hurt than what necessarily conduced to their own particular advantage, in taking a few northern frontier Garrisons, and knowing them to be mostly profane Esau's, a people not much considerate of their own concernments, they hope to buy out their birthrights with a mess of pottage, and yet the Cavaliers hate a Round head, he cannot lightly love a Blew-cap, so that they may perchance find it prove the only stay, to part two fight Mastiffs is to turn a Bear lose upon them both. And as for the Londoners, they are so confident of them, as already they call London (where their Papers of the disposal of the King's person was printed) Edenbrough, upon the frontispiece thereof, nor is it improper for the Metropolis to change her name, when the Kingdom changes her interest.  
And which is the worst part of machiavell they make religion even The solemn League and Covenant to father all their bastards, for my own part I am one that have taken it, and wish all did so that will make conscience to keep it, but cursed be that Englishman that takes it with the Scotch corrupt paraphrase of a joint interest, which ipso facto renders him perjured as to the Oaths of Allegiance & Supremacy, inhibiting all Englishmen to betray or communicate their public interest (especially legislative) to foreign States, and better it were the Covenant were neither given nor taken, then pressed in policy as it is by the Scots, to handfast English men in a joint interest and propriety, or taken with perjury, as it is by the Cavaliers, who make no conscience in swearing, nor forswearing. But we now plainly see what were our brethren's ends in their first propounding this Covenant, not Religion and Conscience, but Design and Encroachment. I dare not judge so undivinely of their Divines who I am confident had honester purposes, but whatsoever was their divinity in it, their equity is stark naught, the Commander in chief whereof in his transactions here in England hath carried himself extreme immorally, to the scandal of Presbytery and meriting the stool of repentance, and yet it cannot be denied but that what he hath done, hath been equitable, for the King raising him, by I know not what mystery of State, from his deep displeasure, to that height of Honour, can he do too much for such a Master? that not only forgave him, but gave him; Who is their main pillar of policy, and strikes the greatest stroke in this masterpiece of transmigration of interest, and like Chancery Bills, affirms any thing, but proves nothing in his papers, knowing that a bad cause is better maintained by a brazen face, (bold assertions) than iron arguments. Therefore they never offer to reply, save with a deaf ear to the House of Commons Answer to their papers, touching the disposal of the King in England, whereby is made evident, that neither as to that particular, nor any thing else, either in, or relating to the Covenant, they have any right or interest to order or dispose thereof by any joint or united property.  
The words of the Covenant being express and clear to the contrary, in every Article of it, engaging both each Nation and each person, To endeavour (both one thing and other) in our several places and callings— in our several Vocations— and according to our places and interests. So that though the Covenant by these definite expressions purposely provide against confusion of Interests, that England and Scotland being several distinct kingdoms, and each one only to act in his several place; Vocation, calling and interest, yet without replying to these reasons brought against their indirect quoting the Covenant in abstract Positions thereby to compass their end of joint interest; they still persist from this Covenant to entitle themselves to the right of exercising a joint power, not only of disposing the King, but the kingdom also, though the Covenant be contrary to the exercise of any joint power which was several and distinct, before the making thereof; and although the joint exercise of such power be a breach of Covenant; both of us respectively being thereby obliged in our several Vocations mutually to preserve the rights, privileges, and Liberties of each Parliament and kingdom, and the exercise of such a joint power, which gives a negative voice to either Nation towards other, is a manifest breach of those Privileges and Liberties, so Covenanted to be entirely preserved, and consequently of the Covenant itself. And whereas both in their Printed papers to the people, and their dissent to the Propositions sent lately to the King at the Isle of Wight, this joint propriety is so much stood upon, yet neither is the word jointly nor any other expression which will bear that interpretation so much as mentioned in the Covenant, but the direct contrary, in those words Bach one in his several Vocation; Calling; Place, and Interest, which runs through the whole Covenant, and which would have cleared the meaning of it, but therefore they cunningly leave it out, and break off in the midst of a sentence, to dective the people, who they find too apt to take upon trust, and to suspect strangers less than there is cause.  
For per fas & nefas, the design if it will not go, it must be driven, and so it is, from one stage to another; for whereas formerly the dispose of the King's person was only pretended to, now they are mounted to a higher stair and step of encroachment, the empowring of the Crown; and whereas the Covenant runs thus: The preservation and defence of the King's person, and authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdom.  
They notwithstanding make a stop at Authority, and thus our English sentences are read with Scotch commas and periods, and the Covenant made to speak what it never meant, and Covenanters to undertake absolutely what they promise but conditionally, by these Scotch Artificers, who make it a nose of wax, and here in England takes upon them to tell you, That the King and Crown shall have the negative voice, the regal Militia, yea and Court of Wards too, or as good, whether it stand with the preservation and defence of true Religion, and the Kingdom's liberties or not, further than which the Covenant binds not; nay though they see apparently all's lost, if it be so, the King being as firm to his principles both Ecclesiastical and Civil, as ever, yea and for our better security, they'll have the Army disbanded in hope the Parliament cannot easily raise another, and so they may command in chief in the North, the Londoners in the South, and the Cavaliers East and West; and then their own flesh and blood, the eleven Members may return in freedom, honour, and safety, and put Mr. Pellam in the chair again. Thus they do by us as the Philistims did by Samson, been use they cannot bind us, they put out our eyes, and make us 〈◊〉 round in a Mil, leave us as they found us & worse, besides the expense of so much blood and money since, with our hands in our pockets; that so their new brotherhood the Cavaliers may rise and cut our throats, with whom they are confident of a joint interest both in King and Kingdom.  
When they were pleased to say, It was prejudicial to both Kingdoms, (for there lies the Emphasis) for the King, (because they had no mind to him) to go into Scotland, 〈◊〉 were content they should leave him in England, where also they'll dispose of him, and have him come to London, in ●●●●…dome honour and safety (which are comprehensive terms; before any peace be concluded or propositions granted, and that too, as the safest for the Kingdom (I should say both Kingdoms) under penalty of breach of Covenant, which they use now as the Pope in old time was wont to do his excommunications, to compass Kingdoms. And for his coming to London they bring a weighty reason of suitable sophistry to the rest of their transactions. viz. Because the Parliament invited him to come thither before the wars break out, as being then the only means to prevent them (and now to renew them) that therefore after so much blood and treasure spilt and spent, upon that reason he must come without condition or satisfaction, at his own election, and be restored before His Kingdom be repaired; this is brotherly love and kind dealing indeed. What will posterity think of such Covenanters, brethren, and Auxiliaries, who doubtless are out of our pay and have forfeited their arrears that thus in their late Papers alarm the whole Kingdom, and set their Paymasters at defiance, and would now sell their party to their Prince, as they did their Prince to their Party. Besides that, to pay them were to arm them, till they retract their book: Nor do men use to give wages to those they hire, for going up and down the house from room to room and rid no work, when work is to be done, as the Scots did here in perambulation from Country to Country, and during the wars neither fought battle nor stormed Town but Newcastle, but now they make an amends for their idleness by turning busybodies, they kept their skins whole, and their Army entire to begin, it seems, when we had made an end, but begin when they will, they'll find work for Tinkers; all England is not of one mind, their Papers are too long for all to read them, and too false to be believed by all that do read them, and more there are that side with them for faction, then that will side with them in fight against their Country's interest, But they give you reasons, (or at least would see me to do so) why the Militia must be inherent in the Crown, and the negative voice in the King. The reason of the Militia is because of the protection, the Crown must afford to the people, so says the King when he means nothing less, and further tell us, That for the Crown to be divested of all power and right of the Militia is different from their judgements, a strong reason, and imparatively spoken, enough to have been uttered by the King's negative voice, and for the regal protection they speak of against enemies, we have found, and they have seen it turned to destruction (as still its like to be) and an oath broken on one part, sets the other at liberty, our government being pactional, and our Allegiance according to the nature of but Government, not of slaves and vassals, but of Freemen. As the King is made for the people, and not the people for the King, so is he first bound to the people, and then they to him. But we have now more need of protection against false brethren then open enemies, which we cannot expect from the King their Countryman, and therefore it's better to have the Militia in the power of the Parliament, England's abstract. And as they tell you what their judgement is not, so also what it is, viz. That they think the King in his message from Caresbrooke Castle, hath offered that which should be very satisfactory in the point of the Militia. I wonder not that it contents them, being I am confident a child of their own brame instilled into him at Hampton-Court (when they went to see how he did) for its perfectly like them, a consent like the Covenant (as they make it) merely an aliquid nihil. But what if other men be of other minds, and have not we cause to be so, and to think it unsatisfactory: for is not the Prince in his capacity as bad as the King? principled by father and mother to begin where he leaves; is not the Parliament put in trust by the people to provide for their security; and shall they be so base as to expose posterity, had our forefathers been so selfish, the Freemen of England might have been like the bondmen in Scotland, where the common people speak broken French.  
The reason of the negative voice is, as they affirm, because regal power and authority is chief in making and enacting Laws, and therefore object, That the new preface takes away the Kings negative voice, and cuts off all royal power and right in Law-making, wherein by the way they play the Sophister's (being excellent School men in State matters) for when they speak of the Militia, which is less concerned in terminis in the Coronation oath, which principally respects Civil matters, yet they bring it for a proof as to that, saying, That all Kings are obliged by their Coronation oath to protect their Subjects, but as to his negative voice, the exclusion whereof is both the substance of that oath, and this preamble, they blanche it, taking and leaving as makes for their turns in Oaths and Covenants, and making at best that oath as to the Laws, speak but the language of the Cavaliers, whose interpretation of only protecting the Laws, they take up, and decline that of the Parliaments of confirming and making them, so fully evinced in their Declarations to be the genuine sense thereof, and in right reason, and true construction it must needs be so, That he swears to confirm and grant all such Laws as his people shall choose to be observed, not hath chosen: for first, the word concedis in that oath were then unnecessary, the Laws formerly enacted being already granted by foregoing Kings his predecessors, and so need no more concession or confirmation, else we must conclude that all our Laws die with the old King, and receive their Being a new by the new King's consent. Secondly, hereby the first and second clause in that interrogatory, viz. Concedis justas leges & permit 〈◊〉 protegendas, are confounded, and do but idem re●●●●●●. Thirdly, Quas vulgus elegerit, implies only the act of the people in a dis-junctive sense from the act or consent of the King, but Laws already made have more than Quas vulgus elegerit in them, they have also the Royal consent too▪ so that that phrase cannot mean those Laws wherein the act and consent of the King is already involved. But though the Scots Commissioners approve not of it to be the meaning of that Oath, yet they affirm it undeniably as a position of their own, That regal power is chief in making and enacting Laws; that and protection being of the essence of Kings.  
The Scots say its essential to the King to make Laws, the Preamble to the Propositions says so too, That it's the duty of his office, yet they that affirm that, oppose this, so that there must needs be some great misunderstanding, for there is no difference, which is this. The Scots when they say. It is essential to the King to make Laws, speak by a figure incident to their dialect, that is, They speak one thing, when they mean another (you may find the name of it in Hocus Pocus his politics) intending thereby, That it is essential to him not to make Laws, elegantly asserting the negative (which they contend for) in the affirmative. (For they speak all in the plural number Kings and Kingdoms, nothing but joint interests and equal jurisdiction, municipal laws are out of doors.) And let it be granted that it is a principal part of even our regal authority to make and enact Laws, for the Coronation oath saith as much, That he is to confirm and grant such Laws as his people shall present; so also says this Preamble to the Propositions, and what get they by it? why then say they to take away the Kings negative voice is to cut off all power and right in making Laws; nothing less, this is a mere non sequitur, for to make him that he cannot but make them, is that to make him that he cannot make them▪ There are somethings that God himself cannot but do, (which is as well his perfection and power (not imperfection and impotency) as those things he can choose to do) and does that therefore imply that he cannot do what he cannot but do? Things essential are not arbitrary but necessary, so is making Laws to the Office of a King, but so is not his not making them: It seems by the Scots creed translated into English, (for they are not of this faith, at least not of this practice at home) nothing's royal but what's arbitrary, a position fit for Turks and Infidels to maintain, than Christians and men of erudition, that so prefers will to reason, and the will of one man lapsed and relapsed to the reason of a State, making that which is the worst to rule by, the sole or principal rule of all rule and Government. They are now attained to that confidence as after all that's done and suffered by the Parliament and Kingdom for an establishment of liberty and safety, openly to advocate it for the King against these, (preferring their interest which is against them, above their Covenant which is for them) notwithstanding the profession they made to the contrary and the money, viz. 600000. li. 100000. li. at their coming in, 200000. li. at their going out. 250000. li. for coals at Newcastle. 50000. li. when they lay before Hereford, are such another sum when they lay before Newarke, besides freequarter, arbitrary assesements, and exactions; which in computation during their long stay to little purpose amounted to above as much more. They have had for their seeming serviceableness thereunto. And now all the courtesy we must expect is only this, for they are their own words. It is not our desire that Monarchy should be at the absolute height of an arbitrary and tyrannical power. Implying an allowance or content of some, yea, a great deal of arbitrary and tyrannical Monarchical power, and for this it seems they contend, the whilst they go about to erect these two Pillars of it in the Crown, a Negative voice and a Regal Militia, and indeed the Crown having them, what can hinder it of an arbitrary tyrannical power even to the height thereof, if he that wears it be so disposed, for by the power of the one the people can have no Laws but what he'll grant them, and by the power of the other they are never the better for them, nor surer of them when they have them; the Militia investing the King with a negative power of undoing at pleasure what he of courtesy hath done or granted to them, and so his people are stripped of all power or righ●, both to get or keep what's for their weal or their posterities, and all rendered at the Kings will and mercy and that by Law and Allegiance too, than which I do not well understand how there can be a more absolute height of Monarchical arbitrary tyranny, then by pretended Law and right to have it in his power to do what he will, (absolute persian) for so his will by law gives law to all laws and the subjects benefit in his mere beneficence.  
For if the Subject desire good laws he may stop their mouths and tell them that by Law he may deny them, or if he be in a good mind and grant them, and after change and be desirous either to unmake them or to break them (which yet the Medes could not do) ●s what's more changeable than the will of a King (whether he be England's or Israel's Solomon) subject to alteration upon every puff of passion, or trade-wind of flattery etc. And then if the Subject take arms for defence of their Laws he soils them at that guard too, and and tells them by Law the Militia is his not theirs; And if they reply but he is to use it for the public weal, he answers them, I may choose by my negative voice, and thus the poor Englishman by Scotch sophistry is tossed from post to pillar void of all certainty and stability, and is merely ad placitum in substance, though in shadow a freeman: these are no Levellers, these are Mountainers, high lander: but how can we expect better when strangers and men of contrary interest to us, are our Legislators and take upon them the highest Office of judicatory in this Kingdom next to making Laws (which they say is the Kings, and therefore they will not take that from him.) viz. to interpret our Laws and Liberties, and so by a writ of alienation we are shared out 'twixt him and them, he to make, and they to interpret, and thus the English Parliament betwixt two stools falls to the ground, and becomes a mere nullity, and yet the Scots Commissioners (the renewers of our miseries) play the Courtiers, and tell you in Latin instead of English, that they profess ignorantiam facti & juris alieni, but their words and actions agree as did their words and swords, promise much and do nothing.  
Further to make good these their assertions touching the Kings Right to the Militia, and a Negative voice, they prove it by the Sceptre and Sword, which they say are badges of those powers to be in the King, it may be so in Scotland, but in England they signify not the power of creation (specially not of annihilation of Laws) but of execution of civil and penal Justice, else by this reason the Mayor of a Corporation, whose badges in proportion import the same things, should have a Negative voice, and be a Lawmaker (or law-refuser) who indeed is the Laws Minister, and so is the King, the fountain of Justice not of Laws. But to show how inconsistent and irrational it is for the King of England to have a Negative voice (for, for the impertinencies of other Nations instanced by them, there need no other answer, but that we neither give nor take Laws from any but ourselves) t may appear by these following considerations.  
1. By the Kings not sitting in Parliament to debate and consult Laws, nor are they at all offered him by the Parliament to consider of, but only to consent unto, which yet are transmitted from one of the Houses to the other as well to consult, as consent to, showing thereby that he hath no share in the consultory part of them (for that it belongs only to the people in Parliament to discern and consult their own good) but he comes only at the time of enacting, bringing his royal authority with him, as it were to set the seal thereof to the Indenture already prepared by the people, for the King is head of the Parliament (as of the people) in regard of his authority, not in regard of his reason and judgement, as if it were opposed to the reason and judgement of both Houses (which is the reason both of King and Kingdom) and therefore do they as consult, so interpret Laws without him, supposing him to be a person replenished with honour and royal authority, not skilled in Laws, nor to receive information either of law or counsel in Parliamentary affairs from any, saving from the supreme Court, and highest Council of the King and Kingdom, which admits of no counterpoise, being entrusted with all, above all.  
2. Either the choice of the people in Parliament, is to be the ground and rule of the King's assent, or nothing but his pleasure, & so all Bills though never so necessary for public good and preservation, and after never so much pains and consultation of both Houses may be voided, and so they made mere cyphers, and we brought to that pass, as either to have no Laws, or such as come only and inmediately from the King (who oft is a man of pleasure, and little seen in public affairs to be able to judge) and so the Kingdom's great Council must be subordinated either to his mere will (and then what difference between a free Monarchy, and an absolute, saving that the one rules without counsel, and the other against it) or at the best but to a cabinet council, consisting commonly ●f men of personal interests, but certainly of no public trust.  
3. By the practice of requiring the royal assent even unto those very acts of Subsidies which are granted to himself, and for his own use, which it is supposed he will accept of, and yet Honoris gratia, his royal assent is asked and contributed thereunto.  
Lastly, from the Scots own position, which is this, That regal power and authority is chief in making and enacting Laws, and in protecting and defending their subjects, which are of the very essence and Being of all Kings. Whence I argue, that then he hath a negative power in neither no more in the one then in the other, but as he is not to deny protection to his people, so nor Laws, for (as aforesaid) things essential are necessary, these then being so to the office of a King, he is not arbitrary in their dispensation, but as he must do the one, viz protect not, destroy his people, so also the other, viz. consent not, descent to their Laws, for to consent is either a mere act of his will and pleasure, and then not essential to his place, or the issue of his duty, and then not of his mere will, as it is of a Judge to do justice, and therefore cannot (that is ought not) to be denied, this their own position, whereupon they would build the negative voice, quite destroys it and concludes both against it and them.  
In a word, the Fundamental Law of the Land, is a settling of Government, so as that it may be administered, with honour and safety, and therefore the people first consult their own safety and welfare in Parliament, and then the King, who is to be entrusted with it, is to give an honourable confirmation to it, and so to put an Impress of Majesty and Royal Authority upon it. The Legislative power in England is in the hands of the supreme Government, not Governor, here the people like Freemen offers Laws to be enacted, doth not receive them so, nor aught to be denied them. The King is to give life to such Acts and things as tend to public good and protection, which Acts depend not upon his pleasure, but though they are to receive their greater vigour from him, yet are they not to be suspended at pleasure by him, for that which at first was intended by the Kingdoms for an honourable way of subsistence and administration must not be wrested contrary to the nature of this polity and Institution, insomuch as if the King in his person decline his duty, the King in his Parliament is to perform it; Safety and Being, is to be preferred to Honour and Wellbeing, and Realities to Forms, which are useful, if not hurtful, Good Handmaids, but bad Mistresses, being but Honourable Accidents, not Essences, like beauty to the face, or Jewels to the Crown, which, though they be pawned, it's not essentially impaired; Civil superstition may undo us as well as Ecclesiastical, which commonly go together, and one of them oft times is the punishment of the other; Civil dissensions, Prerogative Wars, and Canterburian Altars began at once. The people's hearts were not prepared, was of old the sin of many ages, and the cause of many judgements, God grant it be not so with England's Israel.  
FINIS.   

Janua. 29. 1647.  
Imprimatur Gilbert Mabbot.