Mercurius Britanicus  
His Spectacles, sent to judge Jenkins to peruse his Recantation,( with some queries taken out of his Confession,] In vindication of the Parliament of ENGLAND.  
AND is this the reward of the alchemists Cost and study? And must it needs be the Philosopher ston? such sparkles will sooner make a brazen face then a Golden▪ Age; I will make good what I say. Make way in the Court there; Let Britanicus come in: David is no judge herre, But a Prisoner at the bar. Come David, ap jenkin, ap judge, ap Malignant, ap Prisoner, hold up thy hand: Thou art Indicted for high Treason, for adhering to the forces raised against the Parliament; what canst thou say for thyself? art thou guilty or not Guilty?  
And why not endure a trial? Look to him Jaylor: But what are the reasons that Mr. Ienkins will not submit, let us examine them, least others be seduced to follow this evil example of casting a way themselves.  
1. He saith, That the houses have not power, because the house of Commons declared the King at this time not to be in a condition to govern, from whom they should have a virtue to govern. But( under favour) let me tell him, that where ever the Kings Person is, or in what condition soever, yet the royal Power is in the Parliament; 1. Radically, and virtually, as in the first subject( they being the representative body of the whole kingdom) 2. Collativè vel Communicativè, by way of free donation. 3. Limitatè The Power being so conferred upon the King, that salus populi, the safety of the people be preserved; Iudges 9. 6. 1 Sam. 11. 15. 2 Kings 10. 5. 1 Chron, 12. 38. Barclaius l. 3. Cont. Monarchomach l. &c. 3. Lavater Serrarius, Cornelius a lapide.  
2. That to declare the King not to be in a condition to govern is Contrary to the oath which the Members take, That his Majesty is the only and supreme governor over all persons in all Causes.  
The oath taken by the Members acknowledgeth a politic power in the King[ governing according to his Oath at the Coronation] for the safety of the people: But not giving away that natural power, which is retained in the Parliament, which they are bound to conserve. The Parliament are as essential Judges as the King; They have more then the King, which is, the regal power by which they are called together, The representative power by which they are chosen, and their own power as parts and special Members of the people, which power remaines with them in what condition soever the King is. Barclajus Lex Rex pag. 60. Althusius polit. c. 1. n. 13. Marius Salomonius de princ. c. 2.  
3. Mr. Ienkins saith that this said Oath, and the said Declaration[ viz. To the Scots Papers Nov. 28. pag. 8.] are both in the present tense sworn, and declared, at one and the same time; But truly he hath been a very weak Lawyer to be Judge so long as he hath been, if he cannot distinguish a King betwixt jus Personae, and jus Coronae, the power of the person, and the power of the crown, and royal O●●●ce. For, to swear an acknowledgement, That the King by the power of his crown and royal Office which is virtually, both in the Parliament, and in all other his inferior Courts] is the only and supreme governor present there over all Persons in all Causes; and to declare that the Person of the King is not in a capacity to govern, when the man that is the King is so, is no contradiction at all, nor any lessoning of the Authority of the Parliament, but a manifestation of that just Power by which they Act: As a Woman that shall obey the Kings official power, in giving faith to her Husband[ according to the laws of the Land] to give her body only to him, and yet shall oppose the Man that is a King, in case he shall offer to Ravish her: The like also in case the King be a Child, and desire things unmeet, or a mad man and seek to kill himself, or his subjects. Arnisaeus 16. Laertius 3. in Plato. Covarruvias Pract. quest. c. 1. Vasquez. Illustr. quest. l. 1. c. 4. nu. ●. ●2. Lex Rex fol. 267. Acts 4. 19. Acts 5. 29 Chrysostom on Rom. 13.  
4. He says that the two Houses are the only supreme Governours in default of the King, for that he hath left his great council, and yet would blame them for not suffering him to come upon his desire, as if this were Contrary to their Oath. This judge is a Reverend machiavellian. But to answer him, In this( I say) they do nothing against the royal Office of the King; Whilst both Houses restrain the Kings private will, as a Man, they act for him as a King and obey his public legal will, de jure▪ And whilst he is absent from his Parliament as a man, he is legally and in his Law-power present, and so the Parliament have his supreme power as Legally as if he were personally there with them, And they are preparing Propositions( which are almost ready) for the safety of the people, to be made Acts by him. Mr. Knox Hist. of Scotland l. 2. page.. 141. Winzetus velitat. adver. Grotius. de jure belly & pacis. l. 1. c. 4. n. 7 Barclay adver. Monarchom l. 3. c. 8.  
5. He says that the Parliament have used the Kegis name only, but have not his Government. But by his leave they act by his power,( as is shewed already) But Illud tantum possumus, quod jure possumus. And therefore as power to govern justly is irrevocably committed by the 3. Estates( who made the King) to the King, so is that same power committed by the Sheriffes cities and Corporations to their Members, to decree in Parliament what is just and good irrevocably; And if we regard the derived and executative power in Parliamentary Acts, they make a total and complete Soveraign-power, Althusius Politic. c. 25. n. 9. Lex: Rex. pag 377. H●licarnass: l. 4. Antiq. Rom. Angelo. Pol. l. 3. c. 3 Barclaius contra Monarch l. 4. c. 10. p. 268.  
6. He would make the world believe that the royal Power is not virtually in the Houses because they sand the Propositions to be signed by the King. They desire the King to sign them ex decentia, of decency and conveniency for his place,( as a City doth supplicate a Lord mayor. But they supplicate not ex debito, of obligation as beggars seek alms: then should they be cyphers, They sand them to the King because he is obliged by his office to pass such Acts as they shall present to him, which he is bound to pass, by an act of royal debt psal: 72▪ 13. Lex Rex. pag. 210 Cornelius Bertramon c. 12. Iunius Brutus vindic. contra tyrant. S 2. Author. Libelli de jure magistrat. in subd. q. 6. Althus. Politic. c. 18. Buchanan de jure Regis apud Scotos,  
7. He saith that to affirm that the Kings power is separable from his person is High-Treason. And give some Examples of the Spencers and others, which are quiter from our case and very much different; We exclude not the person of the King yet wee distinguish( with leave of the Judge) betwixt the persons in linea Physica( we must take phisica largely here,) and in linea morali, obedience, fear, tribute honour is due to the person of the King & to the man who is the King, not because of his person, or because he is a man( Mr. Ienkins may know in what motion, wee take the name person) but because God by the peoples election, hath exalted him to a royal Dignity, and for this cause ill doers are to subject their throats and Necks to the sword of the Kings Executioner, or Hang-man: But if a King seek to destroy his Subjects contrary to the Law of God, and the laws of the kingdom, whom[ by his Oath he is bound to preserve] in such a case there is the royal power in the Parliament; to preserve the people and bring those delinquents to trial which put him upon such dangers. Acts 4. 19. Rom. 13. 1. Grot. de jure belly, & pacis, l. 1. c. 4. n 7. Winzetus velitat. adver. Buchanan. Barclay adv. Monarchom l. 3. c. 8.  
8. He enlargeth himself upon his 6. argument concerning the Kings passing of Acts But let the Judge tell me where there was ever any judicial Act without the Parliament or that the King had ever a negative voice in Parliament.  
9 He saith, That the whole and sole power of pardoning Treasons, and felonies, belongs to the King; And he saith that there was never more cause to have sufficient pardons, then in such troublesone times as these. But[ under favour] Though Kings may do something of grace where there is sign of grace, yet not of mere grace alone, because, what Kings do, as Kings, and by virtue of their royal office, that they do ex debito officij, by debt, and right of their office and that they can not in conscience but do, it not being arbitrary to them to do the d●btfull acts of their office. But what they do of mere grace, that they do as merciful men. Some Kings have given four pardons to one man for several murders though no show of Repentance, of grace in the malefactor. But did not the blood of the three lastly upon that Kings Conscience, to dispute with blood, Numb. 35. 31. Gen 9. 6: Rom 13: 4, Prov 17. 15. Deut: i. 17. 2 Chron 19. 6. Illud potest Rex, & illud tantum quod jure potest Lex Rex: The words are thus: From this it is that deluded councellors made King james[ a man not of shallow understanding] and King Charles to give pardons to such bloody murderers, as Iame● a Grant. And the pardoning of the condem'nd popish priests at New-gate was much contested about by the Parliement. To what effect was the Arch-Bishop of Ca●terburyes Pardon?  
10, Lastly he lays down An Argument, such a one, as is more positively for the Authority of the Parliament, then all that ever he said before had any show of lessoning their power queen Elizabeth[ saith he] summoned her first Parliament, to be held the 23: of Ian. in the first year of her Majesties Reign. The Lords and Comusons, Assembled the 25 of the same Month of I●n[ and did not sit before, what ever he pretends. The Acts of that Parliament bear date Ian: 25 that day they sate; not when they were summoned, and being so concluded by the two houses the queen sent to the Reverend Iudges for their opinions; And it was resolved by all the Iudges of England, that the parliament began not the 23 of january but Ian: the 25[ notwithstanding her Majesties former summons.] As appears 3: Elizab: Dier: 203: The judge you see argues very finely doth he not indeed the man[ very likely] begins to dote in his old Age.  
And this we well know, that all Acts of Parliament, bear da●e [ not from the time of the Coronation of the present King in whose reign they are made, but] from the time of each Parliaments first sitting.  
See how he concludes, He saith thus.  
I Should hold it a great honour to die for the honourable and holy laws of the Land: That which will save this Land from destruction is an Act of oblivion and his Majesties gracious general pardon; the Souldiers their Arrears, and every man his own, and truth and peace, established in the Land, and a favourable regard had to the satisfaction of Tender consciences.  
Subscribed  
David Jenkins.  
Vpon this Conclusion I shall lay down a few Queries which I observed in the reading thereof.  
1. What Judge Ienkins means by Holy laws, for he doth not say the laws of the Land but the Holy laws, nor can he so properly call the Scripture the laws of England, for those are the laws of the whole Christian world, whether therefore he means not the holy Canon laws of the Bishops[ for so those are called by the Cavaliers,] or perhaps the laws of Rome given to be observed by the Papists in England, for whom he hath done eminent service.  
2. What he means by dying in Honour, whether he expects to be canonised at Rome for his good service?  
3 Whether his opinion for an Act of oblivion, be not directly contrary to what he laid down in his ninth Argument?  
4. Whether all that which follows concerning Souldiers Arrears, tender consciences, and the rest be not published by him, purpoesly to foment divisions amongst us, and raise and increase differences?  
FINIS.