A looking-glass FOR THE PARLIAMENT.  
Wherein they may see the Face of their UNJUST, illegal, TREASONOUS and REBELLIOUS PRACTICES,  
1 Against Almighty GOD.  
2 Against their KING.  
3 Against the fundamental laws of the kingdom.  
4 Against their own Oaths and Covenants.  
Argued betwixt Two Learned JUDGES, the one remaining an exile beyond the Seas, the other a Prisoner for his Allegiance and Fidelity to his KING and COUNTRY.  
Printed in the Eighth year of the Parliaments Tyranny and Oppression. 1648.   

To the Reader.  
COURTEOUS READER,  
WHosoever thou art, that shalt peruse this ensuing Discourse, we desire thee to do it with candour, and without prejudice of opinion; before thou hast warily read it, seriously consider it, and advisedly weighed it; and when thou hast so done, if thou shalt approve of it, practice it, if thou dost not, let us receive thy modest reproof in writing, and inform us better by more learned and infallible Arguments of the truth in those grounds we have laid down to ourselves, and we shall hold ourselves much obliged unto thee, and remain,  
Studious to do thee good, D. I. R. H. Dated Feb. 7. An. D. 1648.   

A LOOKING glass for the PARLIAMENT.  
Judge. SIR,  
I Must confess to you, that I do apprehend that there is a Legislative Power in the Parliament, but I take it to be in sensu conjuncto, not in sensu diviso, in a sense when the KING is joined to both Houses of Parliament, not when he is divided from them either in his Will or Person: For neither House by itself, or both Houses together have Power to make a Law to bind the Subject without the royal assent; now the Legislative Power is nothing else but a Power to repeal old laws, or to make new ones that shall bind the Subject: neither can the KING by himself repeal any established, or make any Law binding to the subject without the preparation or assent of both Houses, not joining with any one House, make a Law or Ordinance to bind the other, nor repeal any Law whatsoever; and I am very confident, you cannot show me an authority in our Laws to the contaary; But you will peradventure say, That the KING will fully absent himself from both his Houses of Parliament, and that thereupon his Power is inherent in, and devolved to the Parliament. If you should make this objection, besides what you will find hereafter expressed as touching this question, the practice of all times show the contrary: for as on the one part, if he be personally present with his Parl. yet he may be wilfully absent, or absent in his will, as if he answer to any bill promoted to him, Le Roy s●avisera, or the King will advise upon it, it stands at present for a negation of the bill, and thereby it is made incapable that Session to be an Act: so on the contrary part, if the King be absent from both Houses of Parliament in person, he may be present in his will; that is, if his person were at York, and both Houses sitting at Westminster, and they should send him Bills to sign which he should accept of, and endorse this upon them (Le Roy le Veut) or the King wills, this is an affirmation of those bills, and makes them Acts of Parliament; which not only proves that one or both Houses by themselves have not legislative power without the King; (for as to the making of laws they have but a preparatory power to frame and present bills for the royal signature and approbation) but also that if the King be absent in person from them either willingly or by occasion of necessity, his legislative power is not representatively lodged in, or devolved unto one or both Houses of Parliament. I will agree with that great lover of Parliaments, and learned Father of the Law, Sir Edward Cook, in the fourth part of his Institutes p. 6. That a Parliament cannot begin or be held but either in the King's person or by representation: By representation two ways, either by a Guardian of England by Letters-patents under the Great seal, when the King is in remotis out of the realm, or by commission under the Great seal to certain Lords of Parliament representing the King's person, he being within the realm, by reason of some infirmity; so that we hereby conclude that the King is not represented in Parliament of common course, but only by special Commission, in one of these two causes: in the first of which cases, Edward Duke of Cornwall, and Earl of Chester held a Parliament in 24. E. 3. for King Edw. the third: And John Duke of Bedford brother and Lieutenant to the King and Guardian of England held a Parliament as Guardian of England in the fifth year of King H. the fifth; and in the second case in 3. E. 4. a Parliament was begun in the presence of the King, and prorogued until a further day; And when William Archbishop of York the King's Commissary by Letters-patents held the same Parliament and adjourned the same, the cause of the said prorogation being because the King was enforced to go into Glocestershire to repress a Rebellion there; so in 28. Eli. Queen Elizabeth by her Commission did by her Letters-patents authorise John Whit gift Archbishop of Canterbury, William Baron of Burleigh Lord Treasurer, and Henry Earl of Darby, to begin, hold, and prorogue a Parliament, and this Commission is entered in the journal book of the Lord's house, over which is written, Domina Regina representatur per comissionarios viz. That our Lady the Queen is represented by her Commissioners: which precedents in both cases plainly prove that the King is not of course representatively in Parliament, nor his power lodged there, but by his special Commissions, or Letters Patents, which may suffice as to this point; but for those parts of your motives, that the power of both Houses is above the Kings, you shall find answered unto hereafter.  
And whereas you write that the Scots have delivered up the King, and that he is a Prisoner, and his Person at their disposition, that the City and Parliament are united, that the whole strength of the kingdom is in their hands, that Bishops will be rooted out, their Lands sold, and Presbyterian government settled; which I conceive you allege as arguments to persuade me to compound, and take the oaths you mention; these are rather arguments of force and fraud, by all zealous lovers of honour, Justice and Piety to be resisted and withstood, then of truth and reason tobe submittd unto, and look more like arguments of suitors Hill, than Westminster Hall; but if you lay them before me, as persuasions of fear and terror, I answer you in the words of King David, that you may see how vain these conceits are, Psal. 2. The Princes of the earth stand up, and take council against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bonds asunder, and cast away their cords from us, he that dwelleth in Heaven shall laugh them to scorn, the Lord shall have them in derision: he shall bruise them with a Rod of Iron, and break them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Be wise now therefore O ye Princes, be learned O ye that are Judges of the Earth. What though many Ox●n are come about the King, and fat Bulls of Rasan have closed him in on every side, that gape upon him with their mouths as if they were ramping and roaring Lions? was not this good King David's case, Psal. 22. 12. was not he hunted after by Saul to destroy his life, as a man hunteth after a Partridge in the mountains? 1 Sam. 26. 20. did not his enemies lie waiting in his way on every side, turning their eyes down to the ground, Like as a Lion that is greedy of his prey, and as it were a lion's whelp lurking in secret places, Psal. 17. 11. 12. They spoke against him with false tongues, & compassed him about with words of hatred, & fought against him without a cause, Psal. 109. 3. And David's enemies kept him Prisoner too as out King is, for they compassed him about, Psal. 140. 9 Nay he complains more heavily; they that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head, they that are mine enemies, and would destroy me guiltless are mighty, Psal. 69. 4. Yet what of all this? Are not there many promises held forth in the holy Scriptures to us, that may assure a man of the smallest faith, that the King shall be reestablished in his Throne, and his enemies confounded, for David assures us there is verily a reward for the righteous, doubtless there is a God in Heaven that judgeth in the earth, Psal. 58. 11. and Psal. 9 The Lord is known by executing judgement, the wicked shall be shared in the works of their own hands, for the poor shall not be always forgotten, the hope of the afflicted shall not perish for ever: and to prove this he affirms by way of evidence, Psa. 27. 2. When the wicked even mine enemies, and my foes came upon me to eat up my flesh, they stumbled and fell, and Psal. 30. He shows his deliverance by his thanksgiving in these words, I will magnify thee O Lord, for thou hast set me up, and not made my foes to triumph over me, thou hast turned my heaviness into joy, thou hast put off my sackcloth, and gi●ded me with gladness. How then can I despair of our King's deliverance and victory? I hope I may without offence say, that I believe our King is a parallel to David in his virtues, and the justice of his Cause, and therefore shall with David Psal. 21. conclude this point, The King shall rejoice in thy strength O Lord, exceeding glad shall he be of thy salvation, thou shalt give him his hearts desire, and wilt not deny him the request of his lips, and why? Because the King putteth his trust in the Lord, and in the mercy of the most highest he shall not miscarry: And for the latter part of your Argument, which is, that either the King will sign the Propositions, and so mine estate will be confiscated, or if he do not, the Parliament will do it by their Ordinances without him: I answer, that I fear not his majesty's consent to give away the estates of his loyal Subjects, but if he be a Prisoner as you signify unto me by your letters that he is, I fear not much that his assent to the Propositions can take away mine estate; neither do I hold it a piece of wisdom to press his consent perdures to such Propositions, for you that are learned in the laws know that such consent is not any way binding at all amongst common persons, a fortiori in the King's cause. And for their disposing of mine estate by Ordinance without the King's consent, I must deal plainly with you, it terrifieth me not at all, for I am clearly of opinion that no Ordinance without the King's consent is binding to the people, or can alter any property that I have in mine estate, by the fundamental laws of the Land: And if the King should consent to such an Ordinance it were only binding till the first Sessions of the next Parliament, and then to die of itself, if not again revived; which if I thought you doubted of, I would take the pains to clear it by citing you authorities sufficient in the point, whereupon I doubt not but you will infer that there can be no good assurance or sale made of the Bishops lands by Ordinance without the King's royal and personal assent, nor that both or either House of Parliament can dispose of his royal person by any Law of the Land (and I hope God will never permit them to dispose of him) otherwise then to re-establish him in his Throne again, and invest him with all his royal powers and interests, which by the known laws of the Land are due unto him, and to make him a glorious King according to their several Declarations, Protestations, oaths of supremacy and Allegiance, and according to their solemn League and Covenant; all which Protestations, Oaths, and Covenants, every Member of both Houses, either by the laws, or by their own Orders, hath or aught to take. Now as concerning the Covenant, if I understand it aright, the principal ends of it are the settling of Presbyterian government in the Church, the extirpation of Episcopacy, the right and privileges of Parliament, the preservation of the King's majesty's person and authority, which is qualified with a clause of equivocation; viz. in the maintenance of the true Religion and liberties of the kingdom, to bring Incendiaries and malignants, or evil instruments to condign punishment; and lastly, to assist and defend all those that join in that League and Covenant, to the ends and purposes aforesaid. These being the ends of the Covenant, it is expedient that I should consider whether it be lawful to take any Covenant tending to these ends: for I will not dispute the legality or illegality of taking of Covenants in general, but whether without my King and his confirmation, I may make any Covenant at all with any sort of people in this Land, especially to abrogate any known and established Law of the Land: Now to pull down that government of Episcopacy which is established by divers acts of Parliament in this kingdom, to set up Presbyterian by force of arms, which is inconsistent with the Laws and Statutes of this realm, and without the King's consent (who by his office of divine appointment, is the nursing father of the Church, as Isaiah 49. 22. and by the Statutes of this Land acknowledged to be supreme Moderator and governor of the Church and kingdom, as hereafter is more at large declared.) I very much doubt and scruple, whether I may do it, and the rather for this cause for fear lest joining in an unlawful Covenant, haply I be found to fight against God, as it was said in the case of the Apostles, Act. 5. 30. for if I enter into this Covenant to eradicate Episcopacy which hath been approved in the Church for the first 1500 years after Christ's ascension by all men that have professed the name of Christ, and was doubtless of apostolical institution (if we may give credit unto the ancient Fathers, and Chronologies of the Primitive times) and make a League to set up Presbyterian government, which was never so much as heard of in the Church under that notion (for aught I can read) till the revolt of the town of Genevah from their obedience unto the Duke of Savoy in the year of our Lord 1535. at which time they took occasion to change their old Religion, and to expel their Bishops for countenance to their rebellion, and called in Calvin a learned man of France bred up in the civil Laws, to be their Moderator in Divinity, whom they after through their inconstancy banished, and would have had a Bishop of the reformed Religion if they could have procured consecration, for want whereof they recalled him again upon second thoughts to perfect their new model of Church-government, which he there established as it happened in the year of our Lord 1541. as partly by his own Epistles, and more plainly by Mr. Hooker's works, and by Franciscus Boninardus his writings to a Sebastian Minister, and elsewhere appears; which kind of Government, as many learned men are of opinion, is neither of apostolical institution, nor example, nor agreeable either to the primitive verity or regiment in the Church, nor the true Christian liberty which the Saints of God do challenge; though I will not deny that there were both Elders and Presbyters in the Church of Christ in the Apostles times, yet I take them rather to be a subordinate, than a distinct degree from the Regiment of Episcopacy. And therefore for me that am not better satisfied in the discipline of Presbytery, and more persuaded of the divine right of Episcopacy, to take this Covenant, were to act a sin of presumption against the persuasion of my conscience, wherein I may be said to fight against God. As for the preservation of the Rights and privileges of Parliament, God forbid, that I should not both swear and covenant to maintain them, so long as the Houses move within their sphere, and steer their course by the known channels of the laws of England, and launch not out into the main of Arbitrary Government without scale or compass, so long I hold myself obliged with my life and fortune to mainetain them. But whether all those things are privileges of Parliament which are now pretended to be so, or whether the Houses move in their proper orb, without irregularity or deviation, it being a matter of state, which I being abroad cannot take so perfect notice of, I leave it to you, and other learned men who are in England to judge of, it being more proper for you, and those that are upon the place to give a determination of it, than myself.  
And as touching the preservation of the King's majesty's person, I hold it my duty to lay down my life and fortune for it, either in Active or Passive Obedience, without any reservation or such restriction as is aforesaid whatsoever. And I could wish for the world's better satisfaction, that the Houses would please to explain themselves, what the Religion and Liberties of the kingdom are they mean by these words (in the preservation and defence of the true Religion, and Liberties of the kingdom) And as touching Incendiaries, Malignants, and evil instruments of all sorts, I could wish they might be tried by indifferent Judges lawfully constituted, and by the known established, laws of the Land, and by those laws to be brought to condign punishment: But to enter into a Covenant or solemn League to defend the persons of those that shall take it in any other sense, than what I have before expressed; I doubt I may not lawfully do it. Another scruple I make, whether this Covenant is not already broken by those that have taken it, in the very Act of restraining the King's Person, and by taking away of his Authority from him, and in other points, I will not now insist upon; if it so fall out in truth, that it be already broken, I ought not then to join in League and Covenant with those that lifting up their hands to the high God, have sworn to maintain and keep the same, and notwithstanding this their Oath, have falsified their faith to him: with whom if I should join myself, I should say with the rebellious Jews, Hosea 10. 3. we have no King, because we feared not the Lord, and what should a King do to us? And I should not only do the same which they have done, but should also favour them that do them, making myself worthy of eternal death, with those Covenant breakers which Saint Paul makes mention of, Rom. 1. 30. 31. And thus much concerning the Covenant. But truly Sir though I take not upon me to dispute the lawfulness of the power of both Houses to impose oaths or Covenants upon the King's people; yet if I were in England, and this Covenant, or the negative Oath, or any other Oath or Covenant were offered to me by way of imposition or constraint, I do confess I should make these two objections against it: the one is that which a wise and great peer of this realm now sitting in this present Parliament objected against that Oath which was offered to be imposed upon all the Members of the great counsel at York, to wit, that I may lawfully refuse to take or submit my se fe to any Oath that is not lawfully enjoined me by Act of Parliament, that is enacted and made a Law, with full consent of the King, Lords, and Commons assembled in Parliament. And the other objection I should make is this, That if the King, Lords, and Commons, with full consent in Parliament, should enact a thing contrary to the Law and word of God, and enjoin all the Subjects of the realm to take an oath to observe it, I might lawfully, and would refuse to take that Oath, rather submitting myself to the punishment inflicted for not taking that Oath, then committing so high a sin of presumption against God and mine own conscience, as to swear to observe a Law which is against his Law, and his most holy Word and commandment. For we ought rather to obey God then man, Act. 4. 19 5. 29. And I am fully of this opinion that there ought not to be any other oath imposed upon the Subjects of this realm than what is imposed and enjoined by act of Parliament, and that only concerning lawful and indifferent things. And when an oath is offered unto us, so conditioned, I am likewise of opinion that both myself, and all other his majesty's subjects are bound to take it and observe it.  
Now as concerning the Oath in question, which is the Negative Oath, which runs in these words (viz.) I. A. B. do swear from my heart that I will not directly nor indirectly adhere unto, or willingly assist the King in this war, or in this cause against the Parliament, nor any forces raised against the two Houses of Parliament in this cause or war. And I do likewise swear that my coming and submitting myself under the power and protection of the Parliament is without any manner of design whatsoever to the prejudice or proceeding of this present Parliament, and without the direction, privity, and advice of the King, or any of his council or Officers, other than what I have now made known: So help me God and the Contents of this book.  
I am much scrupled in my judgement and conscience whether it be not both against the Law and word of God, against the Law of Nature, against the settled, known, established, and unrepealed Laws of this kingdom; against the Law of reason, and against all reason, conscience, honour, and policy, either to take it or require it.  
First, this Negative Oath seems to me to be opposite to the word 
Negative Oath against the law of God  of God in restraining me from the performance and execution of a du●y to my King, which by the Law and Word of God I am enjoined to discharge towards him, By me King's reign, saith God, Prov. 8. 15. therefore I cannot doubt of the lawfulness of their calling, and that they are of divine right and institution, the blessed Spirit of God speaking in Solomon, Prov. 24. 2. Solomon exhorts his son, that is, every child of God in these words, My son fear God and the King, and meddle not with them that are given to change; or as some Translations have it, that are seditious: Here the Holy Ghost joins God and the King under one fear, or under one precept, as if he should say, to fear the King, is to fear God; and unless thou fearest the King, thou canst not fear God, this is no unsound or improper inference; for it is the will of God that thou shouldest fear the King, which will, if thou perform not, thou canst not be said to fear God. Now fear in this place is only taken for subjection and obedience, and this duty of thy obedience and subjection, is as properly belonging unto the King, as thy fear is to God, which our most blessed Saviour Jesus Christ expressly declareth, Matth. 22. 23. in these words, Give unto Caesar those things that are Caesar's, and to God those things that are God's; and though the question were there only concerning Tribute, and asked of the Pharisees and Herodians which were not natural subjects to Cesar, but only brought under by conquest and force, yet our Saviour exhorts the Jews and Herodians to perform subjection to Caesar in paying the tribute due to him, as well as to perform their duties towards God: which saying of his, (though the wicked Jews thought to entrap him by the question) yet could they not reprove it before the people, because they were convinced of the truth of it by the light of nature, having not faith to perceive the divine right, that was couched in it, and therefore they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace, as it is recorded, Luke 20. 26. And though our blessed Saviour might have challenged an exemption from the payment of tribute, as being free, yet because he would not offend Caesar, he caused Peter to pay tribute for them both, as we may read Math. 7. 26. 27. St. Peter writing unto the strangers that dwelled in Pontus, Gallatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bythinia, who were at that time under the dominion of the Roman Empire only by reason of their abode, and so owed but local allegiance to Caesar, exhorts them that they should submit themselves unto all manner of ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake, whether it be unto the King as unto the superior, or unto governors, as unto those that are sent of him, for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well, for so is the will of God that by welldoing ye may put to silence the ignorance of the foolish men. 1 Pet. 2. 15. where we are to understand by the way, that according to the Geneva notes upon that place, by this word, ordinance, is meant the framing and ordering of the civil government, which the Apostle calleth the ordinance of men, not because men invented it, but because it is proper to men to exercise, upon which place of the Apostle, there are these things observable. First, that we ought to submit to the King as superior. Secondly, that where a government is monarchical, as in England, governors are sent by him, and by him only: for if governors had been to have been sent by any other, the Apostle writing by the Spirit of God, if their calling had been lawful, would not have omitted to have instructed those strangers to perform subjection and obedience to them. Thirdly, that it is the will of God that we should submit ourselves to the King as superior. Fourthly, That in so doing we do well. And fifthly, That in doing this well, we shall put to silence the ignorance of the foolish men; that is to say, of such, who hold that subjection and obedience belongs not to Kings, or such that seek to withdraw us from ours; wherefore as St. Paul saith, Rom. 13. 5. we must be subject, not because of wrath only, (or for fear of punishment) but also for conscience sake; for this cause we ought to pay tribute to whom we owe our tribute, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour is due; in which words St. Paul coupleth together the whole duty of subjection and obedience which we owe to our King, tribute, fear, and honour; where, in the first place, we are to consider that St. Paul wrote those precepts to men as free in Christ as ourselves, and to Romans, men of as much learning, courage, and warlike employments, as were any at that time, or since in the world, and men who not long before were brought from the subjection of a popular state, to the obedience of a sole and sovereign Monarchy: neither must we forget that these percepts were written in the time of that heathen Emperor Nero, which then ruled over the Romans, and the most bloody tyrannous and persecuting Tyrant and enemy to the Church of Christ that ever was before or since his time: And yet St. Paul tells those Christian Romans, they must be subject for conscience sake, and his doctrine was true, and not without warrant from God's own mouth; for let a King be never so wicked, yet he is God's ordinance upon us, and being God's Ordinance we are to obey him, by his especial commandment; Jeroboam was a wicked Prince and an Idolater, and caused Israel to fall away from God, and to sacrifice to idols, yet we find that God sent Ahijab the Prophet unto him with this message, 1 King. 14. 7. Go tell Jeroboam, for as much as I have exalted thee from among the people, and made thee Prince over my people Israel; and God sent Jehu with the like message unto Baasha, as we read 1 of Kings 26. 2. And we read of Syrus the Assyrian heathen Emperor, Isaiah 44. 28. where God saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure, and the 45 1. Thus saith the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden to subdue Nations before him; and verse the 5. of the same Chapter, I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God besides me, I guided thee, though thou hast not known me. God also calleth Nabuchaduezar that wicked, Idolatrous persecuting heathen King of Babylon, his servant no less than three times in holy writ, as we read Ier. 25. 9 27. 16. and 43. 10. which several places of Scripture do clearly evidence to me, that be the Prince or King never so wicked or Idolatrous, be he never so unjust; nay be he Pagan or infidel, God acknowledged them to be his own ordinance upon his people; nay, and more, commands his people to yield obedience to them as his ordinance, upon pain not only of temporal destruction, but of everlasting condemnation, and this is proved unto us by that command of God given to his chosen people the Jews, Jer. 27. 12. Bring your neck under the yoke of the King of Babylon, and serve him and live, why will you die thou and thy people by the sword, by the famine, and by the pestilence, as the Lord hath spoken against the Nation that will not serve the King of Babylon, therefore harken not to the words of the Prophets that speak unto you saying, ye shall not serve the King of Babylon, for they prophesy a lie unto you, for I have not sent them, yet they prophesy a lie in my name that I might drive you out, and that ye might perish, ye and the Prophets that prophesy unto you. Nay, God by the mouth of the Apostle St. Paul Rom. 13. 1. commands us upon pain of damnation to obey his ordinance in these words, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, for there is no power but of God, whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the Ordinance of God, and they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation: who these high powers are, St. Peter tells us, 1 Pet. 2. 13. Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the King as supreme, or unto governors, as unto those that are sent by him: The King then is the highest power under God in his realm, and governors are sent but by him, and therefore only to be obeyed, because sent by him: thus we see, were our King an heathen, an Idolater, an unjust, or perjured person, yet he is God's ordinance upon his people; God so acknowledges wicked Princes to be, nay commands obedience to them, lest we be temporally destroyed: Nay, more than that, lest we receive to ourselves damnation: What then? shall I swear not to serve, honour, submit unto, and obey my most Gracious sovereign Lord King Charles, a Christian King, and anointed, crowned; nay my natural King, as religious, just pious, virtuous, merciful, and wise a King as ever reigned over this realm of England, or at this time lives in the world, without disparagement to any Prince, or Potentate now living upon the face of the whole earth: Marry God forbid, for fear I receive unto myself damnation: No, I will with St. Peter, 1 Pet. 2. 17. fear God, honour the King; which words import a most holy ordinance, eternal, and indispensable, and by us for no ordinance of man whatsoever to be omitted, or by any Law to be discharged: thus much in general touching the duty that every Subject owes to his King by the Laws of God.  
But if it be objected, that these general precepts enforce nothing in this particular case of the Negative Oath.  
I answer, they do very pregnantly, for the words of the Negative Oath are these, I. A. B. do swear from mine heart that I will not directly, nor indirectly adhere unto, or willingly assist the King in this War, or in this Cause against the Parliament: In which words there is an inhibition of that duty to my King, which by God's Law and his holy Word I am enjoined to perform towards him: and if I swear this oath, I restrain myself thereby in part of that subjection and obedience which is due from me to my sovereign; for it doth not appear by the Scriptures afore mentioned, nor by any other that I know, that there is any case whatsoever excepted, wherein I ought not to pay tribute, custom, fear, or honour to my King; But in this case I engage myself by mine oath not to adhere, or willingly assist the King in this war, or in this Cause against the Parliament; which is as much to say, as I shall not pay him that is due to him by the Law of God and injunction of the Scriptures: If it be objected that the Scripture binds me not to assist the King, or adhere unto him in matter of War: I answer, it doth, though not in direct words, yet in full effect and substance: for within the precept of Peter 2. 17. fear God, honour the King, And by the first commandment of the second Table, honour thy father and thy mother is included all manner of aid and assistance due to a King both in war and peace, which I prove thus: The Geneva notes, which I follow in the interpretation of Scriptures being most authentical of any in these times of Reformation, commenting upon the 20 Ezek. 12. on these words, Honour thy father and thy mother, express that by the parents also is meant all that have authority over us, wherein the King is included: and upon the 5 Chapt. of Deut. 16. verse upon the same words, gloss thus; not for show, but with true obedience, and with due reverence; and upon the 15. Chap. of Matth. and 4. verse, where our blessed Saviour reproves the Jews for not observing this commandment by offering their Corban, which in their case was much like this Negative Oath in ours, saith thus unto them: Honour thy father and thy mother, and he that curseth father or mother, let him die the death; but ye say, whosoever shall say to father or mother by the gift that is offered by me, thou Mayest have profit, though he honour not his father or mother shall be free, thus have you made the commandment of God of none effect by your traditions: O hypocrites, Esaiah well prophesied of you saying, This people draweth near unto me with their mouth, and honour me with their lips, but their heart is far from me, but in vain they worship me, teaching for doctrine men's precepts. The Geneva notes say, that by honour is meant all kind of duty which children owe to their parents, and what that is, both Arias Mountanus and Vatablus upon the same place interpret, that, Honarare est omni in memento supportare vel sustentare, to honour is to support and help with all manner of aid or assistance whatsoever; by which places of Scripture, and the approved interpretations thereupon, it is manifest, that both by the first commandment of the second Table, and by the precepts of our blessed Saviour, and his Apostles, we ought to aid and help the King with all manner of aid and assistance whatsoever, such as we ought to yield to our parents, if they were assaulted, or in distress, unless as the hypocritical Jews did make the commandment of God of none effect, by offering a gift to the Temple, which they called Corban, and by taking an oath that they were not bound by that gift to help, honour, or aid their father and mother, but that they might have profit by that gift, so shall we make the Law of God, and precepts of our blessed Saviour and his Apostles of none effect, by this tradition of men. This Negative Oath, which would absolve us from our duty of subjection & obedience to our King, as if this oath were to his profit. If we should not aid him or assist him, where is our fear, where is our honour, where is our tribute, where is our subjection? shall we take upon us where the Scriptures enjoins us duties in general? to say, the Scriptures requires not this or that particular at our hands, where those particulars included are in the general.  
But here it may be objected, that the King's war against the Parliament is unlawful, and the Scriptures bind me not to the performance of any unlawful thing, therefore I may safely take this oath: To this I answer, I will not take upon me to determine the question of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the war, but leave that to the judgement of God Almighty, who will one day determine on which side the justice of this War doth remain: but this I know, that it is lawful for the King being invaded, to defend himself, and that his subjects in such a ease are bound to assist him: And if I be persuaded in my conscience, that the right of this war is on the King's side, I am bound to assist him in it, whether the right be with him or not: And this also I know, that the head is over the members, and not the members over the head; and that I also, and all his other subjects ought to perform, if not active, yet passive obedience to him in all causes, at all times, and in all places whatsoever. Furthermore, the Prophet Jer. saith, Jerem, 4. 2. Thou shalt swear in truth, in judgement, and in righteousness, Every oath ought to have these three special qualities, it ought to be made in truth, in judgement, and in justice, whereunto is opposed falsehood, rashness, and unlawfulness; so that if the Negative Oath have any defect in any of these three particulars, we are to lay it aside, and not to take it as being unlawful: The nature of an oath is as a bond, for God himself declares, Numb. 30. 3. He that sweareth an oath, and by it bindeth his soul, with a bond shall not violate his word, but do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth, which is as much to say that he shall not take the name of God in vain; so that hereby I am bound if I take this Oath to perform it according to the letter, and not to evade it by saying, I take it in mine own sense with a mental reservation, but I must do it according to all that proceedeth out of my mouth, & if so, then do I absolutely swear against that duty that I am enjoined to by the Scriptures, for I swear not to adhere to, or assist the K. in this War or this Cause, directly or indirectly, so that I may neither aid him in word or deed, nay not so much as pray for his health or success, nor for the safety of his person, that under him we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty; though the Apostle S. Paul exhorts us in 1 Tim. 2. 2. to pray for Kings to that purpose: Nay, by mine oath I am obliged, if I mean to keep it, to stand by, and see any soldier in the Parliaments Army to kill him, and may not assist him to rescue his life; wherefore if I do observe this Oath, I take it not in truth, but to an unjust and unlawful end, and therefore take it not in justice and righteousness. Secondly, if I understand not what use may be made of this oath, or what I shall be enforced to by it, I take it not in judgement but rashly and unadvisedly, and therein commit a grievous sin. Now I know not, as this Oath is penned, what interpretation may be made of it, for if I take it, I swear that I will not directly nor indirectly adhere unto, or willingly assist the King in this war or in this Cause against the Parliament, nor any forces raised against th●t woe Houses of Parliament in this Cause or War. First, I know what will be interpreted an indirect adhering to the King, or assisting of him. Secondly, I know not what is meant by this Cause, or how far it may be extended. Thirdly, I know not in what sense they take these words against the Parliament, whether they include the person of the King within the word Parliament, or his power only excluding his person: neither do I understand what is meant by any forces raised against the two Houses of Parliament, there being now no such forces in the kingdom, and the War at an end; therefore understanding not the extent of these particulars, I swear rashly, and therein commit a sin of presumption if I take it: And lastly, if I take this oath, I swear to an unjust and unlawful end; for I swear to withdraw mine obedience, subjection and allegiance from him, which is an unjust and unlawful thing, and to an ill end, the same being due unto him by the Law of God, as before is declared by the Law of nature, the Law of the land, and the law of reason, as hereafter shall be proved.  
To conclude this point, in taking of Oaths we ought to take heed, that we observe these rules of the learned Fathers, that is, as to Oaths which we take voluntarily, and not by coercion, or by any impulsive necessity: Ita jurare, ut sacramentum pietatis, ne sit vinculum iniquitatis: so to swear that the Oath or Sacrament of godliness which we take, become not a bond of iniquity to our souls, thereby to engage us in things unjust and unlawful, both against the laws of God and men: And if we take rash Oaths, to do an evil thing, penitenda promissio non perficienda presumptio, we must repent of our oath, and not commit the evil, and if we are enforced to swear that which is unjust and unlawful, and against the laws of God and men, we conceive ourselves not bound thereby, for Injusta vincula rumpit justitia, Justice and equity breaks the bonds of such an Oath from our consciences: It being a certain axiom in Divinity, Quod per sacramentum non tenemur nisi ad bonum, aut legale: By Oaths men are bound to the performance of nothing but what is good and lawful: Now to manifest that this Oath is against the Law of nature, we are to 
Negative Oath against the Law of nature.  consider what the Law of nature is, which we find among the learned to be distinguished into two kinds, general and special: This general by Ulpian de Justitia & Jure L. 1. tit. 1. is thus defined, Jus naturale est, Quod natura omnia Animalia docuit: natural Law is that which nature hath taught all creatures living, which he distinguisheth thus from the special: Jus istud non humani generis proprium sed omnium animalium, Quae terra marique nascuntur, avium quoque commune est, The Law of Nature (saith he) is not proper to man alone, but the same is common to all living creatures, as well to birds as to those which the Land & the Sea produceth; and agreeable to this is the description of the Law of Nature, set down by learned and reverend Hooker, in his first book of ecclesiastical policy, whereby he calls it, That manner of working which God hath set for each created thing to keep, he being a director of infinite knowledge, to guide nature in her ways: But I mean not that this Negative Oath is against this general Law of nature, but there is a more special Law of nature proper to mankind only, which will steer us to the question in hand: which special Law of nature proper to men, St. Augustine in his Epistle ad Hil. 89. & in Evangelium Johanes Tract. 49. defines thus, Lex naturalis est impressio divini luminis, in nobis & participatio legis aternae in rationali Creatura: The Law natural, saith he, is the impression of divine light in us, and a participation of the eternal Law in the reasonable creatures, which distinction is strengthened by that expostulation which Moses makes in the person of God with Cain, before any Law written, Gen. 4. 7. If thou dost well shalt thou not be accepted, & if thou dost not well, sin lieth at the door? for so is the Law of nature imparted unto us by illumination of the Law eternal: that this is most clear, St. Paul witnesseth unto us, Rom 2. 15. 14. For when the Gentiles (saith he) which have not the Law, do by nature the things contained in the Law, these having not the Law, are a law unto themselves; which show the works of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts mean while excusing or accusing them; what other thing was this, but the Law of nature, or the impression of divine light in the hearts of the Gentiles? which doctrine of St. Paul reproves the opinion of those, who think that whatsoever proceeds of nature is sin, for if so it were, that whatsoever proceeds of nature is sinful, how could the consciences of the Gentiles bear witness for them, or excuse them of the breach of the Law? Therefore St. Augustine in his third book de doctrina Christiana, Cap. 14 saith, Omne vitium naturae nocet, ac per hoc contra naturam est, every vice doth wrong to nature, and is therefore contrary to it; and in his 12. book de Civitate Dei, Cap. 1. he saith, Omnia peccata sunt in universum contra naturam & legem naturae: All sins are generally against reason, and the Law of nature: And Damascene, L. 2. fidei Orthodox: Cap. 30. agrees in this with him; for saith he, Homines facti sunt mali declinando in id quod contra naturam est, Men are made evil by declining to that which is contrary to nature: Nature therefore is God's instrument, and none other is her guide, but only the God of nature: for as S. Paul said in his Sermon at▪ Athens when he found an altar directed to the unknown God, Act. 17. 28. in him we live, and move, & have our being, being also of his offspring as he told them: their own Poets said, whereby it is clearly proved, that though the Athenians being Gentiles, and ascribing the being of all things to the Law and course of nature; yet St. Paul could find out another hand in those works besides nature, to whom nature was only subservient, and an handmaid to obey his eternal Law, decree, and purpose according to that order he hath set down for the sons of men for ever to be observed. This short digression I have made only to take away this objection that many make, That we are not bound to observe the laws of nature, and also to let them know that the Law of nature is to be observed, and that as being a participation of the eternal Law, it is both perpetual and unalterable, and not presumptuously to be violated: The consideration whereof moved Pythagoras the heathen Philosopher to publish amongst his golden precepts, this one, nil turpe committas, neque coram aliis, neque tecum maxime omnium, verere teipsum, commit nothing foul or dishonest, saith he, neither to be known to others, nor to thine own heart, but above all things, reverence thine own conscience: but to draw somewhat nearer to the thing in purpose, and to prove that this Negative Oath, is against the Law of nature, I must observe with Hooker, that as there is a Law natural belonging to men, as they are men in their kind, which Law directeth them in the means whereby they are to steer their actions as to their own particular preservations, so there is a Law natural which toucheth them as sociable parts united into one body, a Law which bindeth them to serve unto each others good, and all to preserve the good of the whole, before whatsoever their own particular, and from both those roots or branches of the Law of nature, springs the allegiance, subjection and loyal obedience, which is due from a subject unto his King, from this special Law of nature? Man by the impression of divine light is bound to observe the Law natural, as it is written in his heart, and is part of the Law eternal by which we are bound to obey, and succour, and assist our Parents, whether our natural parents, or the parents of our Country; and from this relative Law of nature, as I may so call it, or the Covenant of nature whereby we are bound as sociable parts by the Law of nature united into one body for the preservation of the whole, the subject to obedience, faith, and allegiance, the King to protection, and to maintain the Laws, bodies, and goods of his subjects, and both together to maintain the peace of all; as Fortescue in his book of the praise of the laws of England, Cap. 13. observes; and therefore Glanvil who wrote in Hen. 2. time. L. 9 Cap. 4. saith, Mutua debes esse domini & fidelitatis connexio, ita quod quantum debet quisque domino ex homagio, tantum debet illi dominus ex domino praeter solam ex reverentiam the knot of faith ought to be mutual between the Lord & his subject or tenant; for look how much subjection or obedience the tenant or subject owes to his Lord, so much doth the Lord owe to his tenant by way of protection, reverence excepted; which knot Aristotle in his first book of politics proves to be the duty of nature; for saith he, To command and obey is of nature, for whatsoever is necessary and profitable for the preservation of the society of man is due by the Law of nature. Now Tully lib. 3. de legibus tells us, that sine imperio nec domus ulla, nec civitas, nec gens, nec hominum universum, genus stare, nec ipse denique mundus potest; which is, That without command or government, neither any house, nor City, nor Nation, nor mankind, nor to conclude, the world cannot stand: but peradventure that will be confessed, and yet it will be denied that the world cannot stand without Monarchy, and objected that Monarchy is not that government that ought to be by the Law of nature: to which I answer with Aristotle, in his first book of ethics, That Jus naturale est quod apud omnes homines eandem, habet potentiam, That is, the Law of nature which with all men hath the same power: Now as Aristotle in his first book of his politics, Cap. 3. and Plato in his third book of Laws, jump in this opinion that in the first beginning of time, the chiefest person in every house was always as it were a King; so when numbers of households joined themselves together, in civil societies, Kings were the first kind of governors among them, which is also (as it seemeth) the reason why Kings have always been, and are to this day called, patres patriae or fathers of their Country: and it is not unknown to any man learned in Antiquity, History, or chronology that it was 3198 years after the creation before any Law was written or given in the world, according to the computation of Joseph Scaliger by the Julian account; The Law being given in that year, and delivered by God unto Moses on Mount Sinai, and whether the old world before the flood were governed by Kings, it is disputable; but sure I am that Nimrod the son of C●sh, the son of Cham, the son of Noah, was a King; for I find Gen. 10. 10. that the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh in the Land of Shinar, and according to the computation aforesaid, began his reign in the 2479 year of the world, which was 720 years before the Law was given, and 149 years after the flood; in all which time it is more than probable that all the Nations of the world (except the Jews) were governed by Monarchies or Kings, and long after the Law was given to the Jews, which is proved unto us by that demand of the Jews made unto Samuel, 1 Sam. 8. 5. And they said unto him, behold thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways, make us now a King to judge us like all Nations: And we see it yet continued to this day among all the Gentiles & heathens upon the earth; by which sort of people, above twenty parts of thirty of the known world are now inhabited: That the only government of each several Nation among them is Monarchy, and much more subjection and allegiance performed by the heathen subjects to their Gentile Kings, then is amongst us towards ours; which is a full argument to me that Monarchy is not only a divine ordinance or institution of God Almighty from the beginning, and a branch of the Law of nature, but also the best of governments too, because those Gentile Nations which guide their actions only by the Law of nature, embrace this form of government and none other, making good that maxim of their heathen Philosopher afore remembered, Jus naturale est quod apud omnes homines eandem habet potentia, which induces me to affect the opinion the more, because I see the Gentiles ever submitted to Monarchy call regiment; for with Monarchy I say, non potest error contingere ubi omnes idem opinantur: And with Teles● non licet naturale universaleque hominum judicium falsum vanumque existimare, an error of judgement cannot be where all men are of the same opinion, and we ought not to esteem the universal judgement of natural men to be false and vain. But I will dwell no longer upon the fringe of this particular, but make this point evident by the Laws of this kingdom, which are a part of nature's Law, That this Oath is against the Law of nature, and for that Cause only, that if I take it, I am thereby withheld from the execution of mine allegiance, whereby I make violation of nature's Law; To make this clear and evident, it appears unto us by Calvin's Cas, recorded in the seventh part of Sir Edward's C●●ks Reports, that there are in our Law four kinds of allegiance; the first 〈…〉 all, which is due from every subject bo●●e within his majesty's dominions, to his Majesty as to his sovereign Lord and King. The second is ligeantia legalis, or legal Allegiance, which is due by every subject to the King by reason of his suit royal, and this is not natural, but created by King Arthur for expulsion of the Saracens, and continued after by others for the Danes exile, and is proper for the suppressing of insurrections, and expelling invaders. The third is, Ligeantia acquisitia, or purchased allegiance, which comes by indenization. The fourth and last, is local allegiance and that is due from strangers, friends to Kings, whilst they are in their dominions. I meddle not with the two last, and omit for brevity sake, and because I shall not need to draw any argument from it, to help myself withal, to speak any thing of legal allegiance: But for natural allegiance, it is absolute pure and indefinite, that such an allegiance there is as natural, if you read the indictment of the Lord Dacres, 26. H. 8. you shall find it run thus, Quod praedictus Dominus Dacre debitum fidei & ligeantiae suae quod prefato Domini Regi naturaliter & de jure impendere debuit minime, &c. which in English is thus, That the aforesaid Lord Dacre not regarding the duty of his faith and Allegiance, which he did naturally and of right owe to, and aught to pay to King Henry the 8. &c. And Cardinal Poole 30. H. 8. being likewise indicted of Treason, Contra dominum Regem supremum & naturalem Dominum suum, that is against the King his natural and supreme Lord; which indictments prove a natural Allegiance to be not only due, but of right due from every subject to his sovereign King, and as this allegiances is natural, so is it absolute, so is it pure, and indefinite, Quia nullis claustris coercetur nullis metis refraenatur, nullis finibus premitur, it ought not to be constrained or bridled with any bonds, nor restrained to any place; for a man though he may abjure his Country, or his kingdom, yet he cannot abjure his Allegiance, nay he cannot alien, give a way, or withdraw his allegiance from his King by the Law of nature, to his King's prejudice, though he should gain his liberty, freedom of estate and honour or advancement unto the bargain; for St. Augustine saith, nemo jure naturae cum alterius detrimento locupletior fieri debet, no man by the Law of nature ought to be made richer by the loss of another; but if I withdraw mine allegiance, the King hath lost a subject, therefore I may not do it, neither can the King release it to any of his subjects, it being an inseparable accident adherent in the person of a King, and is due, omni soli & semper, to every King under heaven from his own natural subjects: It is due to every King, and always to Kings, and only to Kings by the Law of nature: And it is only due to his person, and not to his office, which is only imaginary and invisible, and nowhere formally to be found but in his person, as by the said case of Calvin more fully appears: Hereupon I conclude, that allegiance being due by the Law of nature to the King's person, and that I neither can abjure it, nor alien it, or withdraw it from him, nor he release it to me, and that it is only due to him, and to no other: I cannot take this oath and keep it, without violation of the Law of nature, and manifest injury both to myself and sovereign King, Quia jura natura sunt immutabilia, the laws of nature are immutable, as before is observed, and is plainly held forth by Bracton, L. 1. cap. 6. & doctor & Stud. cap. 5. 6. And so from this point of the Law of nature, 
Negative Oath is against the Law of England.  I come to show that this Negative Oath is absolutely against the known, settled, and established Laws of the Land: the reason is, because if I take it & keep it, it withholds me from the performance of my duty of allegiance which is due to my King from me by the Law of the land; and so I am informed by the books of Law: this term or word allegiance is rendered unto us under divers names in our Law books, as sometimes it is called fides or faith, as Bracton l. 5. Tract. de exceptionibus cap. 24. fol. 427. And so Fleta l. 6. cap. 47. Alienigena repelli debet in Anglia ab agendo donec fuerint ad fidem Regis Angliae, Aliens ought to be kept from acting in England till they shall be of the allegiance of the King, that is by endenization: so Glanvil l. 9 cap. 1. Salva side debita domino Regi & heredibus suis, That is, saving our faith or allegiance due to the King and his heirs: so Littleton l. 2. in chap. Homage, where I do my homage to my Lord, Salve le foy du a nostre senior le Roy, saving the faith which I owe to our Lord the King; and in the Statute of 25. E. 3. De natis ultra mare, these words (faith and allegiance) are coupled together as signifying one thing; sometimes it is called obedientia Regis, our obedience to the King, as in the books of 9 E. 4. 6. 7. 2 R. 3. 2. And in the Statutes of H. 8. 14. cap. 2. and 22. H. 8. 8. and in the book of 22. Ass. pl. 25. it is called ligealty, but by what name soever it be called, whether faith, obedience, ligealty, or allegiance, all is one, it is due still from us subjects to our sovereign Lord the King: by the Statute of 10 R. 2. cap. 5. and 11. R▪ 2. cap. 1. 14. H. 8 cap. 2. and many other, the people are called liege people; and by the Statute of 34. H. 8. cap. 1 and 35. H. 8 cap. 3. and divers other, the King is styled liege Lord of his subjects, and these that are bound under the King's power are called his natural liegemen, as in the 4. H. 3. Fitz. title Dower, and 11. E. 3. cap. 2. So that I may conclude upon these authorities, that Ligeantia est vinculum fidei domin● Regi, our allegiance is the bond of our faith to the King; which being so, we may well say of it as Sir Edward Cook doth, that ligeantia est legis essentia, our allegiance is the essence of the Law, and so it hath been often and sundry times declared by many & sundry, wise, temperate and well advised Parliaments of England. The government of Kings in this Isle of Britain, hath been very ancient, even as ancient as History itself; for those who deny the story of Brutus to be true, do find out a more ancient plantation here under Kings, namely under Samothes grandchild to Japhet the son of Noah, from whom the ancient Britain's that inhabited this Land, are according to their conceits descended: Kings or Monarchs of great Britain had and did exercise far more large and ample power, and did claim greater Prerogatives over the people under their government and jurisdiction, than the Kings of England have done since the Norman conquest, as it is to be seen at large both in the British Chronicles and records of these times, and in our English histories, and may also be gathered out of the writings of the Romans who invaded this Island, and lived here upon the place: and I do not find that ever the people of Britain made any of their Kings by election of voices, or put them out at pleasure, but that the Kingly government and right of the crown, descended always by hereditary descent and succession, though in that infancy of Law and right it may be suspected that there was not so much regularity of justice or observation of right, as in these latter & more refined ages hath or aught to be: I may boldly affirm, and it cannot be denied by any ●●at hath read all the Chronicles and Statutes of this realm, that there hath been any King of England since the conquest, that hath not been acknowledged by both houses of Parliament, of their several times, to be sovereign Lords of this realm, and their sovereign Lords too, although that some of those Kings were only Reges de facto, and not de jure, Kings only in fact and not of right, and such as by the laws of England had no right to the crown; and all the Parliaments since the conquest, have acknowledged that the crown of England, and the government of the realm hath belonged to the Kings, of hereditary right, and not by election; some of these Parliaments, in more express and particular manner than the rest: and they of later times, more amply than the ancient. By the statute called Dictum de Kenilworth, made 51. H. 3. King Hen. 3. is acknowledged to be Lord of the realm, in the statutes made at Gloucester, in the sixth year of the reign of King E. 1. King Edw. 1▪ is acknowledged by the Parliament, to be their sovereign Lord, and so was King Edw. 2. King Edw. 3. King Rich. 2. and all the Kings since, by all Parliaments held in their several reigns; as to the studious Reader of the Acts of Parliament, made in their several times will appear: by a Parliament held at Westminster, Anno 7. Edw. 1. It is acknowledged to belong to the King through his royal signiory, straightly to defend force of armour and all other force against the peace of the kingdom, at all times when it shall please him, and to punish them which shall do contrary, according to the laws and usages of this realm, and that thereunto they were bound to aid him, as their sovereign Lord, at all seasons when need should be: In the reign of King Edw. 2. The two Spencers, Hugh the father, and Hugh the son, to cover the treason hatched in their hearts, invented this damnable and damned opinion, as it i● styled in Calvin's case: That homage and oath of legiance, was more by reason of the King's crown (that is his politic capacity) then by reason of the person of the King, upon which opinion, they enforced execrable and detestable conseque●●s. First, that if the King do not demean himself by reason, in the right of his crown, the Peers are boundly oath to remove the King. Secondly, seeing the King could not be removed by suit of law, that ought to be done by Aspertee, which is as much as to say, by force, and war. Thirdly, that his Lieges were bound to govern in aid of him, and in default of him: All which opinions were condemned by two Parliaments; one held in the reign of King Edward the second; the other in the first year of King Edward the third, cap. 1. as by the old printed statutes appears: by the statutes of 25. Edw. 3. cap. 2, It is ordained, that if a man shall compass or imagine the death of our sovereign Lord the King, or of my Lady his Queen, or of his eldest son; or if any man levy war against the King in his realm, or be adhered to the King's enemies, giving to them aid or comfort in the realm or elsewhere, &c. It shall be judged Treason. It is reported to us by Sir Edward Coke, in the fourth part of his Institut. called The jurisdiction of Courts, pag. 52. That Rot●l● Parliament. Anno▪ 17. Edw. 3. num. 23. It was then agreed in Parliament, that the statute made, 15. Edw. 3. should be repealed, and lose the name of a statute, as contrary to the laws and prerogative of the King. It appears, Rot. Parlia. 42. num. 7. called Lex ●● consuetudo Parliamenti, cited by Sir Edward Coke, in the fourth part of his Institutes, pag. 13. & 14. That the Lords and Commons in full Parliament, did declare, that they could not assent to any thing in Parliament, that tended to the disherison of the King and his crown, whereunto they were sworn; By the statute of 16. Rich. 2. cap. 5. King Richard the second, is by the Parliament called their Redoubted sovereign Lord, and the people his liege people; and by Parliament in the body of that Act; It is acknowledged, that the crown of England hath been so free at all times; that it hath been in subjection to no realm, but immediately subject to God, and to none other in all things touching the regall●ty of the same Crownel; notwithstanding, that afterwards wars was lovyed against him by his subjects, and he was against all Law and right, deposed, or enforced to make a surrender of his crown, or at least they pretended he did so, though some Hystorians doubt whether he ever consented to it, being murdered, to make way for King Hen. 4. who had very small pretents to the crown, as men learned in the laws of this realm have in all time since held; which kind of disposing of the King's person, I hope and believe is not meant by them, and which horrid act▪ though it gave some present security, to some particular persons that were then active▪ in his destruction: yet it cost this kingdom in general very dear, in the expense of blood and treasure in the succeeding times, by bloody civil wars, wherein the decay of men by those wars was so great, that many judicious Historians are of opinion, that the number of men lost in those wars, was not recruited or made up by a following progeny, till the beginning of King James his reign; and it is to be feared that this blood is not expiated and dried up in this land: The gates of Janus Temple being opened, both without the kingdom and within, for the space of an hundred years and upwards, till by God's great goodness there came to be an union of the rights of the two houses of York and Lancaster to the crown of England, in King Hen. 7. and Queen Elizabeth his wife, though that till near the middle of his reign, the sword was not altogether sheathed; but there were some counterfeit pretenders to the crown, which stirred the unconstant multitude to sundry rebellions, which after some time of rest from those civil broils, The King, Lords, and Commons in Parliament, upon full experience and consideration of the troubles past, for the prevention of the like in future times, thought fit to revive the ancient laws of the realm, and to declare that by act of Parliament, which was and had been a fundamental law of the Land, and was before part of the common law, thereof to enact and declare in the eleventh year of the said Kings reign, in the first chapter of the statutes made in Parliament in the said year, in these words.  Anno Vndecimo Henrici septimi. 
The King our sovereign Lord, calling to his remembrance the duty of allegiance of his subjects of this realm, and that they by reason of the same, are bound to serve their prince, and sovereign Lord for the time being in his wars, for the defence of him and the land, against every rebellion, power, and might, raised against him, and with him to enter and abide in service, in battle, if case so require, and that for the same service, what fortune ever fall by chance in the same battle, against the mind and will of the Prince, as in this land sometimes passed, hath been seen, that it is not reasonable but against all laws, reason, and a good conscience, that the said subjects going with their sovereign Lord in wars, attending upon him in his person, or being in other places by his commandment, within this Land or without, any thing should lese or forfeit for doing their true duty and service of allegiance: It is therefore ordained, enacted, and established, by the King our sovereign Lord, by the advice and assent of the Lords spiritual, and temporal, and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by authority of the same, that from henceforth no manner of person or persons whatsoever he or they be, that attend upon the King and sovereign Lord of this land for the time being, in his person, and do him true and faithful service of allegiance in the same, or be in other places by his commandment in his wars, within this Land or without, that for the said deed and true duty of allegiance, he or they be in no wise convict, or attaint of high Treason, ne of other offences for that cause, by act of Parliament or otherwise by any process of Law, whereby he or any of them shall forfeit life, lands, tenements, rents, possessions, hereditaments, goods, chattels, or any other things, but to be for that deed and service, utterly discharged of any reparation, trouble, or loss: And if any act or acts, or other process of the Law hereafter thereupon for the same happen to be made contrary to this Ordinance, that then the act or acts or other process of Law whatsoever they shall be, stand and be utterly void: provided always, that no person or persons shall take any benefit or advantage by this act, which shall hereafter decline from his or their allegiance.  
And Sir, here I desire to know your opinion in your indifferent judgement upon this Law, whether I need to sue out any pardon, or compound for mine estate, having done nothing but the duty of mine allegiance to my natural King.  
By the statute of 24. Hen. 8. cap. 12. It is expressed that by diverse sundry old authentic Histories, and Chronicles, it is manifestly declared that this realm of England is an Empire, and so hath been accepted in the World, governed by one supreme head, and King, having the dignity and royal estate of the imperial crown of the same, unto whom a body politic, compact of all sorts and degrees of people, divided in terms and by names of spiritualty and temporalty been bounden, and given, to bear next to God a natural and humble obedience, he being also instituted and furnished by God's goodness, with plenary, whole, and entire power, preeminency, authority, prerogative, and jurisdiction, to render and yield justice, and final determination to all manner of folks, resiants, or subjects within this realm, in all causes, matters, debates, and contentions, happening or accrueing, within the limits thereof: By the statute of 26. Hen. 8. cap 1. It is declared in ●u●l Parliament, that King Henry 8. was justly, and rightfully aught, to be supreme head of the Church of England, and that he being their sovereign Lord, his heirs and successors Kings of this realm should be so accepted and taken, and should have and enjoy, as united and annexed to the imperial crown of this realm, as well the title and stile thereof, as all honours, dignities, preeminencies, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, immunities, profits, and commodities, to the said dignity of the same supreme head of the said Church belonging or in any wise appertaining: Which statute was confirmed and enlarged in some particulars, by the Acts of Parliament of 28. Hen. 8. cap. 10. and 35. Hen 8. cap. 1. By the Statute of 25. Hen. 8. cap. 22. the Parliament moved King Hen. 8. to foresee and provide for the profit and surety both of himself and of his most lawful succession, and heirs, upon which depended all their joy and wealth; and in whom they acknowledged was united and knit the only mere true inheritance, and title of this▪ realm, without any contradiction: (wherefore we say they) your said most humble and obedient subjects in this present Parliament assembled, calling to remembrance the great divisions which in times past have been in this realm, by reason of several titles pretended to the imperial crown of the same, which sometimes, and for the most part ensued by occasion of ambiguity and doubts, than not so perfectly declared, but that men might upon froward intents expound them to every man's sinister appetite and affection after their sense, contrary to the right legality of succession, and posterity of the lawful Kings and Emperors of this realm, whereof hath ensued great effusion of man's blood, as well of a great number of the Nobles, as other of the subjects of the realm, &c. By the statute of 27. Hen. 8. cap. 24. entitled, an act for recontinuing of certain liberties and franchises heretofore taken from the crown, it is thus enacted, 27. Hen. 8. where diverse of the most ancient prerogatives and authorities of justice appertaining to the imperial crown of this realm, have been severed and taken from the same by sundry gifts of the Kings most noble progenitors, Kings of this realm, to the great diminution and detriment of the royal estate of the same, and to the hindrance and great delay of justice: For reformation whereof, be it enacted by authority of this present Parliament, that no person or persons of what estate or degree soever they be of, from the first day of July which shall be in the year of our Lord God, 1536. shall have any power or authority to pardon or remit any treasons, murders, manslaughters, or any kind of felonies, whatsoever they be. Not any accessaries to any treasons, murders, manslaughters, or felonies, or any utlayers, for any such offences aforesaid, committed, perpetrated, done, or divulged, or hereafter to be committed, done, or divulged, by or against any person and persons, in any part of this realm, Wales, or the Marches of the same, but that the King's highness, his heirs and successors, Kings of this realm, shall have the whole and sole power and authority thereof, united and knit to the imperial crown of this realm, as of good right and equity it appertaineth; any grants, usages, prescription, act or acts of Parliament, or any other thing to the contrary hereof notwithstanding.  Out of which statute I collect that no pardon whatsoever, but the Kings, can free me from his punishment, if I have offended him against my allegiance; by the reading of which Statute, I doubt not but you will be satisfied, that I need not take a pardon from both houses of Parliament; and if I should I can do myself no good by it, but I should thereby make myself a traitor upon Record, to mine own perpetual shame and ruin: for every pardon (you know) if it be sued out before conviction, is a confession of the fault, and if pardon be not good in law, ye● it being a matter of record, the treason thereby stands confessed, and the King's attorney may in after times take advantage of it, because I have confessed it by suing out the pardon. 
And it is also enacted by the authority of the said Parliament, that no person or persons, of what estate, degree, or condition soever they be, from the said first day of July, shall have any power or authority to make any Justices of Oyre, Justices of assize, Justices of Peace, or Justices of gaol-delivery, but that all such officers and ministers shall be made by Letters patents under the King's great seal, in the name, and by authority of the King's highness, and his heir's Kings of this realm, in all Shires, Counties, Counties palatine, and other places of this realm, Wales, and Marches of the same, or in any other his dominions, at their pleasure and wills, in such manner and form as Justices of Eire, justices of assize, justices of Peace, and justices of goal-delivery, be commonly made in every shire of this realm, any grants, usages, prescription, allowance, act, or acts of Parliament, or any other thing or things to the contrary thereof, notwithstanding.  
By the Statute of 1. Edw. 6. cap. 2. It is acknowledged that all authority of jurisdiction spiritual and temporal, is derived and deducted from the King's majesty, as supreme head of the realm; and that no ecclesiastical Court can be held within the realm, but by authority from his majesty. By the statute of 5. and 6. Edw. 6 cap. 11. It is recited, Forasmuch as it is most necessary both for common policy and duty of the Subjects, above all things, to prohibit, restrain, and extinct all manner of shameful slanders, which might grow, happen, or arise to their sovereign Lord the King's majesty, which when they be heard, seen or understood, cannot but be audible and abhorred of all those sorts that be true and loving Subjects, if in any point they may do, or shall touch his Majesty, upon whom dependeth the whole unity and universal wealth of this his realm, &c. By the Statute made in the second Parliament, of the first year of Queen Mary cap. 1. It is acknowledged that the imperial crown of this realm, with all dignities, honours, prerogatives, authorities, jurisdictions, and preeminences whatsoever, to the same united or annexed, were descended unto Queen Mary, and that by force and virtue of the same, all regal power, dignity, honour, prerogative, preeminency and jurisdiction, did appertain, and of right aught to appertain unto her, as to the sovereign supreme governor and Queen of this realm: By the statute of primo Eliz. cap. 1. The Queen's right, as belonging to the crown of England, and are restored to her, and the Oath of supremacy enacted and then made; and by another Act made the same Parliament cap. 3. Entitled an Act of Recognition of the Queen's highness' title to the imperial crown of this realm, the whole Parliament acknowledgeth the Queen's right to the crown by lawful descent and succession, both by the laws of God, and the laws and statutes of this realm, with all the rights, prerogatives, preeminencies, and jurisdictions whatsoever, belonging or appertaining to the same, binding themselves therein by solemn oath, to maintain" the title of her and her heirs thereunto: Neither can I omit to remember that famous and never to be forgotten Act of Recognition of his right to the crown of England, made to King James our King's Father in full Parliament, in the first year of his reign, which that it may the more clearly appear what it is, I have here transcribed at large, without addition or diminution of word or syllable, as an Act to the observance whereof, I am obliged, and was bound in the loins of mine Ancestors, who were then representatively present in the same Parliament, which act of Parliament is thus entitled, A most joyful and just Recognition of the immediate lawful and undoubted succession, descent and right to the crown: The act itself is printed in the statutes at large, in these words.  

Anno primo. Iacobi Regis.  
Great and manifold were the benefits (most dear and most gracious sovereign) wherewith Almighty God blessed this kingdom and Nation, by the happy union and conjunction of the two noble houses of York and Lancaster, thereby preserving this noble realm, formerly torn and almost wasted, with long and miserable dissension and bloody civil wars. But more inestimable and unspeakable blessings are thereby poured upon us, because there is derived and grown from and out of that union of those two princely Families, a more famous and greater union (or rather a reuniting) of two mighty famous and ancient kingdoms (yet anciently but one) of England and Scotland, under one imperial crown, in your most royal person, who is lineally, rightfully, and lawfully descended of the body of the most excellent Lady Margaret, eldest daughter of the most renowned King, Henry the seventh, and the high and noble Princess Queen Elizabeth his Wife, eldest daughter of King Edward the fourth: The said Lady Margaret, being eldest sister of King Henry the eight, Father of the high and mighty Princess, of famous memory, Elizabeth late Queen of England.  
In consideration whereof, albeit we your majesty's most loyal and faithful subjects of all estates and degrees, with all possible and public joy and acclamation by open Proclamations, within few hours after the decease of our late sovereign's Queen, acknowledging thereby, with one full voice of tongue and heart, that your majesty was our only lawful and rightful liege Lord and sovereign, by our unspeakable and general rejoicing, and applause at your majesty's most happy Inauguration, and Coronation: by the affectionate desire of infinite numbers of us of all degrees, to see your royal Person, and by all possible outward means have endeavoured to make demonstration of our inward love, zeal, and devotion to your excellent Majesty, our undoubted rightful liege sovereign Lord and King: Yet as we cannot do it too often or enough, so can there be no means or way so fit, both to sacrifice our unfeigned and hearty thanks to Almighty God, for blessing us with a sovereign, adorned with the rarest gifts of mind and body, in such admirable peace and quietness, and upon the knees of our hearts, to Agnize our most constant faith, obedience, and loyalty to your Majesty, and you royal progeny, as in this high Court of Parliament, where all the whole body of the realm, and every particular member thereof, either by person, or by representation (upon their own free elections) are by the laws of this realm, deemed to be personally present.   
To the acknowledgement whereof to your majesty, we are the more deeply bounden and obliged, as well in regard of the extraordinary care and pains, which with so great wisdom, knowledge, experience, and dexterity, your majesty (fithence the imperial crown of this realm descended to you) have taken for the continuance and establishment of the blessed peace, both of the Church of England in the true and sincere Religion, and of the commonwealth, by due and speedy administration of Justice, as in respect of the gracious care, and inward affection, which it pleased you on the first day of this Parliament, so lively to express by your own words, so full of high wisdom, learning, and virtue, and so replete with royal and thankful acceptation of all our faithful and constant endeavours, which is and ever will be to our inestimable consolation and comfort.  
We therefore your most humble and loyal subjects, the Lords spiritual and temporal, and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, do from the bottom of our hearts yield to the divine Majesty all humble thanks and praise, not only for the said unspeakable and inestimable, benefits and blessings above mentioned, but also that he hath further enriched your highness with a most royal progeny of most rare and excellent gifts, and forwardness, and in his goodness is like to increase the happy number of them: And in most humble and lowly manner do beseech your most excellent Majesty, that (as a memorial to all posterities, amongst the Records of your high Court of Parliament, for ever to endure) of our loyal obedience, and hearty and humble affection; It may be published and declared in this high Court of Parliament, and enacted by authority of the same.  
That we (being bounden thereunto both by the laws of God and man) do Recognise and acknowledge, (and thereby express our unspeakable joys) That immediately upon the dissolution and decease of Elizabeth late Queen of England; the imperial crown of this realm of England, and of all the kingdoms, dominions and rights belonging to the same, did by inherent birthright, and lawful and undoubted succession, descend and come to your most excellent Majesty, as being lineally, justly, and lawfully, next and sole heir of the blood-royal of this realm, as is aforesaid: and that by the goodness of God Almighty, and lawful right of descent under one imperial Crown, your Majesty is of the realms and kingdoms of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, the most potent and mighty King, and by God's goodness, more able to protect and govern us your loving subjects, in all peace and plenty, than any of your noble progenitors; and thereunto we most humbly and faithfully do submit and oblige ourselves, our heirs and posterities for ever, until the last drop of our bloods be spent: And do beseech your Majesty, to accept the same as the first fruits in this high Court of Parliament, of our loyalty and faith to your Majesty, and your royal progeny and posterity for ever: which if your Majesty shall be pleased, (as an argument of your gracious acceptation) to adorn with your majesty's royal assent (without which, it can neither be complete and perfect, nor remain to all posterity, according to our most humble desires, as a memorial of your princely and tender affection towards us) we shall add this also to the rest of your majesty's unspeakable and inestimable benefits.  
And by the statute of 3. Jaco. cap. 4. by which statute the oath of allegiance is enjoined: It is declared, that if any person shall put in practice to absolve, persuade, or withdraw, any of his majesty's subjects from their obedience to his Majesty, his heirs, or successors, or to move them, or any of them, to promise obedience to any other Prince, State, or Potentate, that then every such person, their procurers, counsellors, aiders, and maintainers, shall be adjudged traitors: And do not the Parliament, both in the first, and third year of this King, acknowledge King Charles; nay even in the petition of Right, and in every Parliament since to be their sovereign Lord? Can it then be doubted (upon due consideration had of the forementioned Acts of Parliament, and the several declarations made by the Parliaments of all ages) that the right of the crown, is an hereditary right, and that King Charles is our lawful sovereign Lord, and supreme governor of the realms, or that allegiance is not due to him from all states of this kingdom, and from every one of his subjects within the same? Surely no, if you think that there can be any, I desire you will please to return me the legal reasous of your opinion therein, upon consideration had of these Statutes, and why the power of both Houses of Parliament, is above the Kings; neither are the prerogatives afore cited due to him by the acknowledgement, recognistions, and declarations of Parliament only, but these are due unto him by the common fundamental and municipal laws of this realm, according to the testimony of the learned Writers of the Law in all ages, and by the continual language and judgements of the Sages of the law in all preceding Kings reigns, since we have had books and reports of the law published: For first it appears by the ancient Treatise, called Modus tenend● Parliamentum, which is a part of the Common law of the Land: and as Sir Edward Coke, 4. part of his Institutes, page 12. observes, was made before the Conquest, and rehearsed unto King William at his Conquest, who approved of the same; and according to the form of it, held a Parliament, (as ti is reported to us in the year book of 21. Ed. 3. fol. 60) that the King is Caput principium & finis Parliamenti, The King is the head, the beginning and the end of the Parliament; and by the book of 21. Hen. 7, fol. 20. it is held, that it is no statute, if the King assent not to it: and that the King may disassent; and by Andrew Horne's book, called the mirror of Justices, which was written in the time of King Edward the second▪ it is said that they are guilty of perjury, that encroach any jurisdictions belonging to the King, or ●alsifie their faith due to him: Bracton who wrote in the time of King Henry the third, (a learned Author of the laws of England) lib. 4. cap. 24, sect. 1. hath these words, Rex habet potestatem & jurisdictionem super ●mnes qui in Regnosuo sunt, ea que sunt jurisdictionis & pacis ad nullum pertinent, nisi ad Regiam dignitatem, habet etiam coertion●m ●t delinquentes puniat & coerceat; The King, saith he, hath power and jurisdiction over all men which are in his kingdom; those things which are either of jurisdiction or peace, belong to none but to the Kingly dignity, he hath like wise a constraining power to punish delinquents; and lib. 3. cap 7. he saith, that Treasons, felonies, and other pleas of the crown, are propriae causae Regis, are causes belonging to the King's punishment only; and in his fift Sect. of the same fourth book, saith thus, Omnis sub Rege & ipse sub nullo, nisitantum Deo, non est inferior sibi subjectis, non parem habet in regno: in English thus, Every man is under the King, and he under none but God alone, he is not inferior to his subjects, he hath no peer in his realm: And in his fift book, in his third Treatise of default, cap. 3. he saith thus, Rex non habet Superiorem nisi Deum, satis habet ad penam quod expectat Deum ultorem, The King hath no superior but God alone, and it is sufficient punishment for him because he must expect God to be the revenger, if he do commit wrong: It is said in Plowden's Commentaries, fol. 234. That the King hath the sole government of his Subjects, and fol. 213. as also in Calvin's case▪ That allegiance is due to the natural body of the King; and fol. 242. it is said, That the natural body of the King, and his politic, make but one body; for as long as the natural body lives, the politic is inherent, being merely imaginary and invisible as it is said in Calvin's case; whereupon I infer, that the King's politic capacity (his body being absent) is not in the Parliament. And in 10. Eliz. Plowdens' 316. it's affirmed, That the law makes not the servant greater than the Master, nor the subject greater than the King, for that were to subject order and measure; since therefore the King hath so undoubted a right to the crown, and is my lawful sovereign, and mine allegiance is due unto the King's person, by the Law of the Land, Recognized and acknowledged in so many several Parliaments in all ages, and confirmed by so many undeniable authorities in Law, reported in our Books, and since it stands proved, that mine Allegiance is due unto his natural person, both by the Law of God, nature, and the law of the Land, and can neither be abjured, released, or renounced, being inseparable from the person of the King, and indispensably due from me to him; I conclude that the Oath which binds me, if I take it, and keep it, to withdraw mine Allegiance from my liege Lord the King, is against the law of the Land, and in taking it, I not only make an absolute breach upon the law of the Land, but also in my judgement I do thereby incur the crime of perjury by the law, in falsifying my faith and Allegiance to his Majesty King Charles, God's anointed, and crowned my natural liege Lord, sovereign, and my lawful King, both by descent, Coronation, investure, and undoubted right, which is not only due to him by the Law of the Land from every of his subjects, but every one of them is to take this following Oath for performance of it.  
Viz. You shall swear that from this day forwards you shall be true and faithful to our sovereign Lord King Charles, and his heirs, and faith and truth shall bear to him of life and member and terrene honour, and you shall neither know nor hear of any ill or damage intended unto him, that you shall not defend, so help me Almighty God. Which form of Oath every Subject by the Common Law is bound to take, as appears by Britton 5. Edw. 1. cap. 24. And by Andrew horn in the mirror of Justices, pag. 226. and in Calvin's case as by perusal of their books will appear, and by diverse others which for brevity's sake I omit.  
And now Sir, I desire to know your opinion likewise, whether that by the Common Law, both houses of Parliament are in power above the King, or where their legal power to dispose of his majesty's person, other than to his honour and good, according to their duty, oaths, Protestations, Covenants, and Declarations, and obedience is to be found.  
I come now to prove that this Oath is against the Law of reason, the Law of reason saith Doctor and Student, cap. 2. is written in the hearts of every man, teaching him what is to be done, and what is to be fled: And because it is written in the heart, therefore it may not be put away, nor is it ever changeable by any diversity of place or time; and therefore against this Law, prescription, statutes, or customs may not prevail; and if any be brought in against it, they be no prescriptions, statutes, nor customs, but things done against justice and void; and in this it differeth from the Law of God, for that the Law of God is given by Revelation from God▪ Almighty, and this Law is given by a natural light of understanding, and is given principally to direct our actions by, for the obtaining of felicity in this life, so us we guide them only by the rule of Justice: This Law instract●th us, saith the same Author, that good is to be done, and evil is to be avoided, that thou shouldest do● to another, that which thou wouldest another should do to thee: That justice is to be done to every man and not wrong: that a trespass is to be punished & such like: Is it so then, that the law of reason directs me that good is to be done, and evil is to be avoided? I then conclude that this oath is against this Law; for if I by this Oath shall withdraw mine Allegiance and subjection to my King from him, I lose the benefit or good I should have by his protection: for the rule in Law is, Quod Subjectio trahit protectionem, quia Rex ad tutelam Legis corporum & bonorum erectus est as Fortescue lib. de laudibus legum Angliae, c. 13. Obedience of the Subject draws protection from the King, the King being ordained for the defence of the Law, & the bodies, & goods of his Subjects.  
The holy Scriptures inform me, that I must obey my King for conscience sake, and this Law teacheth me, I must avoid evil; but it is evil for me to obey men in taking this Negative Oath which enjoins me not to obey my King, rather than God, who enjoins that duty of obedience, therefore I conclude that this Oath is against the Law of reason. This Law teacheth me to do as I would men should do unto me, but if I were a King I would not be despoiled of the duty and service of my Subjects; therefore this Oath enjoins me to a thing against the Law of reason: It is injustice and wrong to take away the Kings right by this Law; but this Oath binds me to take away his right and do him wrong, therefore in this particular also this Oath is against the Law of reason. And lastly this Law of reason teacheth me, a Trespasser is to be punished, it teacheth me also to understand that to take this Oath is to trespass upon my King's interest in me as I am his Subject; to trespass upon his laws as I am de jure under his government, and to trespass upon his patience and goodness, if he do not hereafter punish me for it: Therefore I conclude this Oath is against the Law of reason. The Law of reason generally taken, is a directive Rule unto goodness of operation, saith Hooker: so that by this Law we ought to direct all our actions to a a good end, but by taking this Oath I direct not my actions to a good end; therefore I am not to take this Oath by this Law: the Law of reason saith Sophocles is such that being proposed, no man can reject it as unjust and unreasonable, but the King may reject this manner of imposing of oaths upon his Subjects whereby he isdeprived of their aid and assistance without his assent: And the Subjects may reject this Oath as unreasonable and unjust; because if they take it, they are thereby bound either to break their Oath, which is a grievous sin, or to lose the benefit of protection, which by the laws they may claim, and aught to have from their natural lawful and sovereign Liege Lord, and King; Therefore this Oath is against the Law of Reason.  
Lastly, whereas the Law of Reason is never changeable by any diversity of place or time, and whereas mine Allegiance is due to my sovereign in all places, in all cases, and at all times, I am forbidden by this unchangeable Law, to change so unchangeable and unalterable a duty by such an unwarrantable Oath in these changeable times. To conclude all in this point, as it is against reason to take this Oath; so it is against reason to require it of me, for it is most unreasonable to offer any Christian man such an Oath as that by taking of it, he must by perjury, and sin of presumption (as he is persuaded) destroy his soul, or by refusing of it, because it is against his conscience to take it, either by perpetual imprisonment or starving, destroy his body and estate. And it is likewise most unreasonable for any men to offer this Oath to another that have not taken it themselves: for by the rule of the civil Law, l. in Aren. Quod quisque, which is a branch of the Law of reason, Quod quisque juris in alium statuerit ipsum quoque uti debere: No man ought to impose a Law upon another, which he himself hath not submitted unto.  
I come now in the next place to make it appear that I cannot take this Negative Oath with a good conscience. Conscience, as Doctor and Student well observes, l. 1. cap. 15. 'tis the direct applying of any science or knowledge to some particular act of a man, and of the most perfect and most true applying of the same to a man's particular actions, follow the most perfect, the most pure, and the best conscience; which enabled St. Paul by his right applying of the Law of God to the Actions of his life, with confidence to plead his cause before the counsel, and to cry out, men and brethren, I have in all good conscience served God unto this day, Acts 23. 1. And in the 24 14. being accused before Felix by the Jews, saith, But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my Fathers, believing all things which are writ in the Law & the Prophets. And herein I endeavour myself to have always a clear conscience towards God, and towards men: whereby it is clearly proved that the applying of the Scriptures, and the knowledge of divine truth to the actions of ourlives, is, and aught to be, the only direction to our consciences; It is expedient then for the clearing of this point, that I should set forth and consider the actions of my 〈…〉 to this particular which concerns some Allegiance: ●●●● then I do well remember that when I was matriculated in the University, I was sworn to be a faithful and true Subject ●o the King, and to bear him ●●ue Allegiance: Secondly, I have taken th●… of Oath, which I have particularly s●● down before, th●● I w●… and ●●●● bear● to him of life and m●…, and terre●…. Thirdly, I have four times taken the Oath 〈…〉 enjoined by the Statute of 1. Eh●. cap. 1. and three 〈…〉 Oath of Allegiance enjoined by the Statute 3 Iac. cap. 4.  
It rests now that I should apply that divine knowledge and science, which I have obtained ●y reading of the Scriptures, to th●se actions: First▪ then an Oath is to be carefully weighed before we take it, ●…ch as 〈…〉 duty towards our King, and 〈…〉 E●●les. 8 ● Ec●… Pre●c●e●, adviseth me thus, 〈…〉 of the ●●o●●h of the King, and to the Oath of 〈…〉, upon which plac●… thus gl●sse, that is, ●… King, ●●● keep the Oath that thou hast made for that cause. 〈…〉 Zachary gives us this commandment from God, Zach 8 17▪ ●●t none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour, and love no false Oath, for all these are the things that I hate, saith the Lord: And our blessed Saviour in his Sermon in the Mount, Matth. 5. 33. Delivers me this prec●p▪ Thou shalt not for swear thyself, but shalt perform thy oaths to the Lord: By applying of these Scriptures to my former oaths, I find I cannot take this Negative Oath without a great sin against God, and trespass against my conscience: for having bound myself by so many several former oaths made to my King, to pay unto him mine Allegiance, faith▪ and truth to him, of life and member, and terre●●● honour, and acknowledged him to be supreme governor of this realm; how can I now withdraw mine Allegiance from him, or swear that I will not aid or assist him, o● adhere unto him by this latter? without manifest perjury, breach of mine Oath to the King, and by taking of a false Oath, or the name of God in vain by a questionable authority imposed upon me, contradictory to those oaths which by undoubted and lawful power agreeable to the laws of God and the realm, I have already bound my conscience to the observance of: It fareth not with us in Oaths, as it doth in cases of laws, Quod Leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant, That the latter laws repeal the former that are contrary unto them: for in the case of laws, the rule is admitted to be true, where both are constituted and made by the same power, but it is clean contrary in the case of oaths: for when a man hath taken a lawful Oath, by and from a lawful authority, though it be grounded upon human or positive law only, as upon a Statute or the like, that Oath is binding to his conscience until the Statute that enjoins that Oath be repealed by the same power that made it; and if he afterwards take a contradictory Oath to that former Oath before, such repeal, and a lawful authority to take the same; that Oath which he so takes, is both unlawful and false; unlawful in that it is against the law that warrants the Oath, he hath before taken; and false in regard that he engages himself by that Oath to perform that thing which by the Law of God and conscience he is not enabled lawfully to perform; so that till the laws that impose upon me the oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance which I have taken, be lawfully by the same power as they were made, that is to say, by the King, Lords, and Commons, by Act of Parliament repealed: And this Negative Oath by the same power of Act of Parliament imposed upon me, I cannot submit my conscience to take that Oath, without perjury and falsehood. Again, when a man hath taken an Oath to perform that which by the law of God and nature he is bound to perform, as to obey his King, or to honour his Father and Mother, this Oath can never be abrogated or dispensed withal, nor a man absolved from the duty of observance of it by any power under heaven, and therefore if I shall take any Oath contradictory to the former oaths of Allegiance and duty to my King, which duty and allegiance belongs to him from me, by the law of God and nature, as before is made manifest, that Oath were utterly unlawful and false, by the laws of God and nature and against conscience; I conclude then that in conscience I cannot take this Negative Oath. I learn likewise by Saint Paul, Heb. 6. 16. That men verily swear by him that is greater than themselves, and an Oath for confirmation is an end of all strife: and therefore Joshua▪ when he had made a league with the Gibeonites, though it were grounded upon a fraud on their parts, did omit to question them for it, and forbore to break the league with them to avoid strife having confirmed that league with an Oath, saying in that case, Thus will we do to them and let them live, lest the wrath be upon us, because of the Oath which we swore to them, Joshua 9 20. And by that law of an O●h was Sh●mei put to death by Solomon for walking out of the City contrary to his Oath, because he had sworn he would not go out of it, which he ought to have observed as a confirmation of his undertaking to Solomon, and as an end of their strife, as we find●, 1 Kings 2. 43. &c. and we find a notable instance of the punishment of the breaking of the oath of Allegiance or subj●ction made by the King of Jerusalem to the King of Babel, reported unto us by the Prophet Ezekiel, Eze. 17 16. 18. in these words, As I live saith the Lord, he that is King (of Jerusalem) shall die in the midst of Babel, in the place of the King, whose Oath he despised, and whose covenant made with him he broke: Neither shall Pharaoh with his mighty host and great multitude of people maintain him in the war, when they have cast up Mounts, and builded Rampires to destroy many persons, for he hath despised the Oath, and broken the Covenant, yet he had given him his hand because he hath done these things he shall not escape. The application of these Scriptures to my present purpose I make thus, Is it so then that an Oath is taken for confirmation? Is it so then that an Oath is and aught to be the end of strife? Is it so that God punisheth the violation of oaths, and that the greatest power on earth cannot protect a man against him, I learn then by the rule of a well informed conscience to discern, that I ought not to break my oaths lawfully taken upon any grounds or pretence whatsoever: Nay by this Oath I find that if I take it I should in stead of an end of strife in my conscience, incur great vexation, through the horror of the sin, as being an act unlawful, and because by it, I have offended God in the breaking my former oaths lawfully taken, I should raise strife and trouble in my soul and conscience, and great strife and perturbation of mind for fear of punishment. I conclude therefore that I cannot take this Oath by the rule of God's law, with a sound and good conscience, against the light whereof, if I should take it, I should declare myself either to be an Athoist, in thinking there were no God to punish for s● great a wickedness, or else to imagine that he were either unjust and would not punish, or unable and could not, or so careless of the actions of men, that he either not seethe or not regardeth their wicked acts; which opinion even the very heathens confuted and rejected, as you may find at large in Tullys first book, De natura Deorum: But if I were minded to be so wicked▪ as to lay aside all the former considerations of Religion, nature, law, reason, and conscience, to gain my estate, which God forbid; yet in honour, neither myself, nor any that have served his Majesty in this late War, can take it, as I conceive: when I speak of honour I mean not that Membranall or Parchment honour of dignities, and titles conferred upon men sometimes for money, sometimes for affection, sometimes for alliance to favourites, sometimes for flattery, ●u● most commonly more for some sinister respects, then proper 〈…〉, by letters patents of Kings and free Princes, but I mean that ●●●●●all honour that is inherent, in every truly noble mind▪ and direct▪ it ends always to that which is Lundabile & honestum, la●daol●, just, and honest, of which honour the Poet Juvenall●●i●h thus, Nobilitas sola est atque unica virtus, virtue is the only ●●ue nobility; and in another place describing this kind of honour in the person of a Father to his Son, saith thus,  
Malo pater ibi sit, Thersites dummodo tu sis,  
Aeacidae similis vulcaniaque arma capessas,  
Quam tibi Thersiti similem producat Achilles.  
That is, that he had rather his son were the son of Thersites (a base and ill conditioned fellow) and were like Aeacides a person of great valour, honour, and justice, then that he were descended of Achilles the noblest house of the Grecians, and should be such a base fellow as Thersites; the application is easy, It is an honourable mind, which makes a man honourable▪ and it are his honourable actions, which are the proper effects of virtue, that render a man truly honourable; and gain him esteem: The Ethicke Philosophers say that honour est plus in honorante quam in he●…, there is more honour in him that gives the honour, then in him that receives it, or is honoured; and it is true every way: for as there is more honour in a King that bestows it, then in the subject that receives it from his Prince; so is there more honour proceeds from him that bestows it in report or esteem upon him that deserves it for his noble and virtuous actions, than there is in the party deserving it himself: and the reason is plain; for let a man do never so many honourable actions yet if they are not esteemed ●y others, he reaps not the fruit of his labours, his honour is less (though the actions in themselves be honourable) then if they were esteemed: This honour and esteem is the life of every soldier and Gentleman, which if he once lose by any voluntary act of his own, he had as good lose his life. Now for any man that hath served the King in his Wars, for him to swear that he will no more aid nor assist the King in the War wherein he engaged himself by his oath, and upon his honour to serve him with his life and to his uttermost power, it would lose that soldier his honour and esteem amongst all sorts of men, amongst his own party for deserting a cause they hold just amongst the adverse party for lightness and inconstancy, as one that would not stand to his principles, he should amongst all men get the opinion of a Coward, or a base fellow, that for fear of death, punishment, or perpetual imprisonment, would be starved into an oath, or ●ut of his allegiance, or of a K●●ve that to redeem his liber●y would swear any thing; therefore lest I should gain such an opinion and lose my esteem in the world (being now brought into that condition that I must be a soldier) I cannot take this Oath by the rules of honour, and as it is not honourable in me to take it for the reasons aforesaid, so is it against honour that an oath that would bring so much inconveniency of loss of honour and esteem amongst all men should be offered to any man, Quia in juramentis administrandis dantis & recipient is eadem est ratio & idem jus, In administering of oaths the same reason and law ought to bind the giver as well as the receiver: It is also against policy either to take or require this oath, the life of a soldier is his honour, when that is lost, his life is as good as lost; by taking this oath, a soldier loseth his honour, what King, Prince, or State, will entertain that soldier in his pay that hath abjured his natural sovereign Liege Lord, or Master's service and allegiance: his own King will never trust him more, the adverse party will not trust him, nor any other Prince or State whatsoever, and therefore in policy a soldier ought not to take this oath. And lastly, there is no policy in pressing this oath upon any, for the Parliament gains no security by taking it, for I think very few of the King's party hold that Oath lawful, and then what security to the Parliament in it, since no other thing can be expected from him of the performance of an oath given unto him, that either doubts the power unlawful that administered it, or that holds the matter or thing he is bound to perform by his oath unlawful, that then he will keep such an oath no longer than till the first time he hath occasion or opportunity to break it; Nay the same Religion or new light that hath taught him to break the King's Oath will or may teach him to break the Parliaments.  
Having now made my doubts according to my conscience, if I come over and be made a prisoner, because I will not take these oaths and covenants, or suffer any other prejudice either in mine estate or person, for declaring my conscience herein, I would, and in the case I am, I will with holy Job content myself saying, Naked came I out of my mother's womb and naked shall I return thither, the Lord gave and the Lord hath taken away▪ blessed be the name of the Lord, Job 1. 21. Comforting myself with this of the P●almist, Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord, or who shall rise up in his holy place? even he that hath clean hands and a pure heart, and that hath not lift up his mind unto vanity, nor sworn to deceive his neighbour, he shall receive the blessing of the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation, Psalm. 24. 3▪ 4, 5. And according to the instructions of St. Paul 1. Rom 12. 12. Shall rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, and continue in prayers, strengthened with all might according to God's glorious power, unto all patience and long suffering▪ with joyfulness, Colos. 1. 11. Knowing that all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution, 2 Tim. 2. 12. Taking the Prophets who have spoken in the name of the Lord for ensamples, of suffering affliction and patience, Jomes 5. 10. And accounting it always thankworthy, if for conscience towards God, I endure grief, suffering wrongfully, for even hereunto are we called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that we should follow his steps, 1 Pet. 19 20. And in this resolution by God's gracious assistance, in peace of a good conscience, and in all patience will I abide till my dissolution shall come, looking for that blessed hope and appearing of that glory of that mighty God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, Tit. 2. 13. Choosing rather to suffer adversity with the people of God, then to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season, Heb. 11. 25. For what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole World, and lose his own soul, Mar. S. 36. In this opinion therefore will I abide putting my whole trust and confidence in God my Lord which executeth justice for the oppressed, which gives bread to the hungry, and loseth the prisoners, for the Lord heareth the poor, and despiseth not his prisoners, psalm 66. 33. and 146. 7.  
To conclude Sir, whereas you signify unto me that you will return me a satisfactory answer to my doubts, from godly and learned divines, and men of judgement in the laws of the Land, ● desire you that you will please to take advice only from such divines, as neither have renounced their Orders, or obedience to their Ordinaries, and such that are without partiality or hypocrisy in this public cause, and from such Judges and learned Lawyers as serve not the times, so much as the truth, and such as have not men's persons in admiration because of advantage; for I must deal plainly with you, that there is great scandal in th●se foreign parts upon the men of these professions, it being reported of the first, that they go about to profane and blespheme the Church their Mother with stigmatical imputations of Antichristian impieties, and th●● the latter have adulterated the laws, the Nurses that have fed them; applying them to the humours and ends of those that have put them in authority, and as the Proph●● Mich. 3 9 saith, abhorring judgement, and p●v●rting all equity, in that they take upon them to give sentence of death upon ●●ose that have served his Majesty, according to their duty of Allegiance in these ●at Wa●s, as felons, when they have but taken an horse or arms for the King's service, though they took them from those that were actually in arms against the King's Majesty▪ with an intention only to aid his Majesty against those that had risen up against him, and not animo furan●i, or with a felonious intent: Nay, we hear that some of the Judges lately put into Commission by both Houses of Parliament have delivered it for Law, that such a one as hath served the King in these late wars (or any such that they call Malignants) may not sue for their rights, and are incapable to receive justice, though they be neither outlawed or committed, that whatsoever they recover or purchase before they have made their Compositions ought to be seized on, and sequestered to the use of the State; I pray you Sir, where, or in what books of the laws of England do you read of such definition of felony or inhabilities or incapacities of the King's loyal Subjects? Mr. Littleton who reckons up all the inhabilities of the Subjects of England, mentions none such, neither are any such else where to be found: but these men put the King's Liege, and loyal people into a worse condition than slaves, villains, or aliens. And yet they account it lawful taking, and no depredation when any man that hath served both Houses of Parliament in this late war hath plundered or taken any man's goods or estate from him, that they did but imagine bare good affection to the King, and give their judgements that it is lawful to seize, sequester, nay to ●ell away men's estates that have served the King before they have legally convicted them of any offence. O horrible perverting of judgement and justice if this be true, I pray you sir may it not be said of these men as the Prophet Amos 3. 10. saith, They know not to do right saith the Lord, who store up violence and robbery in their palaces, that turn judgement into wormwood, and lea●● of righteousness in the earth, Amos 5 7. and are not they such as Solomon speaks of, Prov▪ 4. 16. That they sleep not except they have done mischief, and their sleep is tak●n away un●●sse they cause some to fall, for they eat the bread of wickedness, and drink the wine of violence, or as David saith, Ps. 58. 2. that weigh the violence of their hands in the earth. But Sin, I speak not this with reference to you, for I know you to be a man of learning, and I hear that you are a man of moderation, and I desire you since that you have taken that employment upo● you to continue so: Remember your Oath that thereby you are to dispense justice indifferently to the King's people, according to the known and established laws of the Land, not by arbitrement o● fancy; consider the infirmity of your Commission upon what hath been said before, set before your eyes the mortality of the 44 Judges removed and put to death by King ●●s●●●● for violence, injustice, and c●rr●p●●●● ac●●d upon the people of this Land ●● his ●●me, of whose offences and ●a●a●●●●●s you may read in H●●e his mirror of Justices, behold and weigh the punishment and d●●●●ny of Sir Thomas Weyland, Sir R●●ph Heng●a●, Sir John L●●●●o●, Sir William B●●mpt●●, Sir Solomon R●c●●ster, Sir ●ic●a●● B●●●●nd, and their fellows, ●●flected upon them for their injustice by King Edw. the 〈…〉 Consider the instability of all ●umane estates, think not that you are in a sure and unque●●io●able 〈…〉; but remember that Job tells you, Job 1●. 18. That the Lord loo●●●● the bonds of King●, and guirdeth their loins wi●● a g●●d●e, and I prov you take the counsel of the w●sem●●, P. o. ●7. 1. Boast not thy ●●●fe ●● to morrow, for thou knowest not what a day may ●●ng ●o●th: he ●●k ● to St. James, J●. 4 13 Go● to now y●e that say to day or to morrow we will g●e into such a City, and continue there a year, and buy, and sell▪ and get ga●e? whereas y●● know not when shall be on the morrow for what is ●●●● life, it is even a valour that appears for a little time, and then v●●●sh ●●●way? do● just●●● therefore and execute● g●●●▪ us judgements, rejoice not in your 〈…〉, for all such 〈…〉 young i●●v●ll; and remember with the same Apostle, that to him that knoweth ●●●●● good, and doth it not, to him it is sin: I know you are learned in the L●w●●, and a great Student in the holy Scriptures, I therefore sum up all with these exhortations but of God's holy Writ, not only to you, but to all the Judges of the  
● no, beginning it with the charge given by Moses to the Judges of Israel. Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him; ye shall not respect persons in judgement, but you shall hear the small as well as the great, you shall not be afraid of the face of man, for the judgement is God's. Deut. 1. 16. 17 and with the good King Jehosaphat to his Judges, 2 Cron 19 6. Take ●eed what you do for ye Judge not for ma●, out for the Lord who is with you in the judgement: take likewise the prophet's instruction, Es●y▪ 1. 17. Learn to do well, seek▪ judgement, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow; and if these serve no● to persuade you, hear God's own words, Levit. 19 15. you shall not do unrighteousness in judgement, thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty▪ But in righteousness shall thou judge thy neighbour▪ and ●x●d. 23 6 thou shall not wrest the judgement of the poor in his cause▪ nay more, follow our blessed saviour's Precept, Jo●. 24. Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgement, that is according to your oaths, and the known and established laws of the Land; if ye do otherwise, you have our saviour's promise that you shall ●e are of it, Mat. 7. 2. For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged, and with what measure ye m●a●e, it shall be measured to you again. The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces, out of heaven shall ●e thunder upon them, the Lord shall judge the ends of the earth, and shall give strength u●to the King, and exa●t the ho●●●● of his Anointed, for God himself is Judge, Psal. 50 6. and he shall judge the world in righteousness, Psal. 9 8. to whose protection I commit you, and to whom with our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ, and the blessed Spirit be all honour, and glory, world without end.  
Amen.  
FINIS.