A Pious and Learned SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE HIGH COURT OF Parliament, 1. H. 4. by THOMAS MERCKS' then Bishop of CARLISLE.  
WHEREIN HE GRAVELY AND Judiciously Declares his opinion concerning the Question, What should be done with the Deposed King RICHARD the Second.  VERITAS VIRES●IT WLNERE  printer's or publisher's device 
London printed for N. V. and J. B. ●●●●   

A Speech wise and Religious, Spoken in the High Court of Parliament in the I. year of the Reign of H. the 4. by the pious, learned, pillar of the Church, Thomas Mercks' Bishop. of CARLISLE.  
THomas Mercks' the Bishop of Carlisle, a man that used both liberty and constancy in a good cause; in his private judgement, having never allowed these proceed, but dissembled his dislike, till fit time to declare it, being in a place to be heard, and by the order of the House, not to be interrupted of any, risen up, and with a grave countenance, and settled courage, said; This Question (right Honourable) concerneth a matter of great consequence and weight, the determining whereof will assuredly procure either quiet or turmoil, both to the public State, and our particular consciences. Therefore before any resolution thereof be given, I beseech you to take into your more serious consideration, these two things: First, whether King Richard be sufficiently deposed or not: Secondly, whether King Henry be by Justice and good advisement seated in the Succession: In the first point is to be examined, whether a King by lineal succession, crowned, anointed, and lawfully invested, may upon imputation, either of negligence or tyranny, be deposed by his Subjects? secondly, what Richard had omitted in the one, or committed in the other, that might deserve that heavy judgement? I will not dispute what may be done, in a Popular, or Consular estate, in which though one beareth the Title and Honour of a Prince, yet he hath no supreme power of a King. But in the one the Nobility, and chief men of State; in the other, the people have greatest Prerogative: in neither the Prince. Of the last sort was the Common wealth of the Lacedæmonians, who by that form of government which Lycurgus framed, oftentimes fined, sometimes fettered their Princes, sometimes put them to death; such were the petty Kings in France in Caesar's time, who were oftentimes arraigned and executed: and the Princes of the Leodi●nses, as Ambiorix confessed, had no greater power over their subjects, than their subjects had over them. And of the second condition were the Roman Emperors at the first, being subject to the censure of the Senate; and such are now the Emperors of Germany; whom the other Princes by their Aristocratical power, do not only restrain, but sometimes remove; such are the Kings of Denmark and Swethland, who are many times by their Nobility dejected, either into prison or exile: such are the Dukes of Venice, and some other free States of Italy: And the chiefest cause why Lewis Earl of Flanders, was lately expelled, was for assuming unto himself the Cognizance of life and death, which Authority was never incident to his Dignity. In these and such like Governments, the Prince hath not absolute Regality, but is himself subject to that power, which is more transcendent than his, whether it be in the Nobility or multitude. But if the Sovereign Majesty be in the Prince, as it was in the first three Emperors, and in the Kingdoms of judaea and Israel, and is now in the Kingdoms of England, France, Scotland, Spain, Muscovia, Turkey, Tartary, Persia, Ethiopia, and almost all the Kingdoms of Asia, and Africa; although for his vices, he be unprofitable to the Subjects, yea hurtful, yea untollerable; yet can they neither hazard his power, nor harm his person, either by judicial proceed, or by force; for neither one, nor all Magistratec have any Authority over the Prince, from whom all Authority is derived, and whose only presence doth silence and suspend all inferior jurisdiction and source. And for power, what Subject can assist or counsel, or conceal violence against his Prince, and not incur the high and heinous crime of fawsonry or treason; it is a common saying, thought is free, free indeed from punishment of secular Laws, except by word or deed it break forth into action; yet the secret thoughts against the sacred Majesty of a Prince, without attempt, without endeavour, have been adjudged to death. And some, who in auricular confession, have discovered their treacherous devises against the King in person, have for the same been executed. All Laws do exempt a mad man from punishment, because their actions are not governed by their will, and the will of man being set apart, all his deeds are indifferent, neither can the body offend without a corrupt or erroneous mind, yet if a mad-m●n but draw his weapon upon his King, it hath been adjudged worthy death. And lest any man should surmise, that Princes for the maintenance of their own safety, and sovereignty, are the only authors of these Judgements; Let us examine with consideration, the patterns and precepts, to this purpose set forth in the sacred Text. Nabuchadnezzar King of Assyria, wasted all Palestine with fire and sword, oppugned the whole City a great while, and at the last expugned it; slaughtered the King, burned the Temple, carried away the holy Vessels and Treasure, and permitted the Soldiers with unmerciful cruelty to spoil and ransack all the people with fire and sword, and whom from thence had escaped, and the pestilence had spared, he led captive into Chaldea, and there erected his Golden image; commanding those that refused to worship it, to be cast into the fiery Furnace: notwithstanding God calleth Nabuchadnezzar his servant, and promiseth him wages for his service. And the Prophets jeremiah and Barucke, did write unto the Jews to pray for the life of him, and of Balthasar his son, that their days upou earth might be as the days of Heaven: And Ezechiel with bitter terms upbraideth the disloyalty of Zedechiah, for revolting from Nabuchadnezzar, after homage done unto him. Did not Saul put all the Priests to death, because one of them did relieve holy and harmless David? Did he not prosecute his faithful servant, and dutiful son-in-law, yet was not he spared, nay, protected by him? And was not David much grieved for but taking away the lap of his garment, and afterwards caused the messenger to be slain, that upon request, and  pity did lend his hand (as himself reported) to hasten the voluntary death of that sacred King? As for the contrary examples of jehu, they were done by express Oracle and Revelation from God, and are no more set down for our imitation, than the robbing of the Egyptians, or any other particular or privileged commandment, but in the general precept, which all men must generally follow: not only our actions, but our speeches also, and our very thoughts are strictly charged, with duty and obedience to Princes, whether they be good or evil. The Law of God ordaineth, That he that do●h presumptuously against the Prince, shall die, Deut. 17. 12. And the Prophet David forbiddeth both by precept and practice, to touch the Lords anointed: Thou shall not (saith the Lord) Rail upon the judges, neither speak evil of the Ruler of the people. And the Apostles do demand further, that even our thoughts and souls, be obedient to higher powers. And lest any should imagine, that they meant of good Prince's only, they speak generally of all. And further, to take away all doubt, they make express mention of the evil: For the power and Authority of wicked Princes, is the ordnance of God. And therefore Christ told Pilate, That the power which he had, was given him from above. And the Prophet Esay called Cyrus, being a profane and Heathen Prince, the Lords anointed: For, God turneth the hearts even of wicked Princes to do his will. And as jehosaphat said to his Rulers, They execute not the judgement of man, but of the Lord. In regard whereof David calleth them Gods, because they have the rule and authority even from God, which if they do abuse, they are not to be adjudged by their Subjects, for no power within their Dominion is superior to theirs. But God reseructh them to their sorest trial, Horribly and suddenly (saith the Wiseman) will the Lord appear to them, and a hard judgement shall they have. The Law of God commandeth, that the child should be put to death, for any contumely done unto the parents: but what if the Father be a Robber? if a murderer? if  excess of villainies, odious and execrable both to God and man▪ surely he deserveth the greatest degree of punishment, and yet must not the son lift up his hand against him for no man can be so great an offender as to be punished by parricide. But our Country is (or aught to be) more dear to us than our Parents. And the Prince is the Father of the Country, and therefore more sacred and dear to us, than our Parents by nature, and must not be violated, how imperious, how impious soever he be? Doth he command or demand our purses or persons? we must not shun the one, nor shrink from the other; for as Nehemiah saith, Kings have dominion over the Cattles of their Subjects at their pleasure. Doth he enjoin those actions, which are contrary to the Laws of God, we must neither wholly obey, nor violently resist, but with a constant courage, submit ourselves to all manner of punishment, and show our subjection, by suffering and not performing; yea, the Church hath declared it to be an Heresy, to hold, that a Prince may be slain, or deposed by his Subjects, for any default or disorder of life, or default in Government. There will be defaults so long as long as there be men; and as we endure with patience, a barren year, if it happen, and unseasonable weather; so must we tolerate the imperfections of Rulers, and quietly expect either reformation or alteration, But alas! what such cruelty what such impiety, hath King Richard committed? examine the imputations objected, with the false circumstance of aggravation, and you shall find but little of truth, or of great moment; it may be many oversights have escaped (as who lives without offending) yet none so grievous to be termed tyranny, as proceeding rather from unexperienced ignorance, or corrupt counsel, than from any natural or wilful malice. Oh! how should the world be pestered with tyrants, if Subjects might be permitted to rebel, upon pretence of tyranny; how many good Princes should often be suppressed by those by whom they ought to be supported? if they but levy a Subsidy, or any other taxation, it shall be judged oppression; if they put any to death for traitorous attempts against their persons, it shall be exclaimed at for cruelty; if they shall do any thing against the good liking of their people, it shall be proclaimed Tyranny.  
But let it be that without desert in him, or authority in us, King Richard must be deposed; yet what right hath the Duke of Lancaster to the Crown? or what reason have we, without right, to give it him? If he make Title as Heir to King Richard, then must he stay King Richard's death; for no man can succeed as heir to the living; But 'tis well known to all men, who are not wilfully blind, or grossly ignorant: that there are some yet alive, lineally descended from Lionel Duke of Clarence, whose issue by the judgement of the high Court of Parliament, in the 8. year of K. Richard's Reign, was declared heir apparent to the Crown in case King Richard should die without issue. The claim from Edmund Crouchbacke, I pass over the Authors thereof, themselves being ashamed of so absurd an abuse; And therefore all the pretence now on foot, is by right of Conquest, and the King's resignation and grant, and the consent of the many: it is bad stuff that will take no colour; what conquest can a Subject make against a Sovereign, where the war is insurrection, and the victory high Treason? King Richard's resignation, being in prison, is an act of exaction by force, and therefore of no force to bind him; And by the Laws of this Realm, the King by himself cannot alienate, the ancient Jewels and ornaments of the Crown, much less give away his Crown and Kingdom. And custom we have none, for the vulgar to elect their King, but they are always tied to accept of him, whom the right of succession enables to the Crown, much less can they make good that Title, which is by violence usurped; For nothing can be said to be freely done, when liberty is restrained by fear; As for the deposing of Edward the Second, it is no more to be urged, than the poisoning of King john, or the murdering of a lawful Prince: we must live according to Laws, not Examples, yet the Kingdom than was not taken from lawful Successors; But if we look bacl to times past, we shall find that these Titles were more strong in King Stephen, than they are now in the Duke of Lancaster, for King Henry the 1. being at liberty, neither restrained, nor constrained, the people assented to this designment, and thereupon without fear or force he was anointed, and crowned King. Yet Henry fitzempress, having a nearer right to the Crown by his Mother (notwithstanding his Father was a stranger, and he borne beyond the Seas) never ceased the prosecution of bloody wars, to the great effusion of blood, and spoiling the Country, until his lawful inheritance was assured him. It terrifieth me but to think, how many flourishing Kingdoms have been by such contentions, either rend by intestine division, or subdued to foreign Princes, under pretence of assistance and aid. This Kingdom hath had too woeful experience of these several mischiefs, and yet neither examples of other Countries, or miseries of our own, are sufficient to make us be wary. Certainly, I fear, it will betid us, as it did to Esop's Frogs, who being desirous to have a King, had a beam given them, the first fall affrighted them, but when they saw it lie still, they contemptuously insulted thereon, and desired a King of more active spirit; Then a Stork was sent them, which stalking amongst them, daily devoured them, King Richard's mildness hath bred in us this scorn, interpreting it to be cowardice and dulness of nature; I dare not say (yet give me leave to suspect) with greater courage, we may find greater cruelty. And thus have I declared my opinion, with more words, you may perhaps conjecture than wisdom, yet fewer than the weight of the cause did require: And I do resolutely conclude, that we have neither power nor policy, either to depose King Richard, or in his place to Elect Duke Henry; That King Richard remaineth still our Sovereign Lord, and therefore it is not lawful for us to give judgement against him; That the Duke whom you are pleased to style King, hath more transgressed the King and Realm, than Richard hath done either against him or us; For he being banished the Realm for ten years by the King and Council (amongst whom his own father was chief) and given oath not to return without special licence; He hath not only broken his oath, but disturbed the peace of the Land, dispossessed the King of his Royal estate, and now demandeth judgement against his person, without offence proved, or defence heard; if this injury move not, yet let both our private and public dangers somewhat withdraw us from these violent proceed.  
FINIS.