A LETTER to Mr. Samuel Johnson, occasioned by his Argument, proving that the Abrogation of King James, &c.  

To the Reader.  
THis Letter comes to you by the direction of Mr. Samuel Johnson; it was sent to him in a private and friendly manner, and he desired it might be printed, and then he would give his Thoughts of it; which was charitably done, that the Nation might partake farther of his Ability in this most important Point of Government, the Original and Nature of it, its true Intent and Limitations, to make it consistent with the End for which it was ordained, the Good and Safety of the People; towards which I am glad it happens in my way to contribute, by being the occasion of prompting others to speak, who can do it much better than myself.   

The LETTER.  
SIR,  
YOU have suffered much, contending for the Good of your Country, and asserting the true English Freedom; and you have given us another Effort of your Zeal in the late Tract which you bestowed on the House of Commons, entitled, An Argument proving that the Abrogation of King James by the People of England from the Regal Throne, and the Promotion of the Prince of Orange, one of the Royal Family, to the Throne of the Kingdom in his stead, was according to the Constitution of the English Government, and prescribed by it.  
This you prove, pag. 50. by a Declaration of the Lords and Commons 10 Ric. 2. in their Message to the King, which is mentioned by Knighton, and the import of it is, That if the King will not govern according to Law, the People may Depose him, and set up some other of the Royal Family in his stead. And the Declaration mentions that they have it by ancient Statute; but you confess, p. 52, 53. that there is no such Statute to be found in the Records of the Tower, or any where else.  
But besides this, you will be  told that this was a Rebellious Parliament, such as that in 1641. and their deposing R. II. and setting up H. IV. was declared illegal; and this was the Rise of that bloody and long lived War 'twixt York and Lancaster,( and therefore a very unlucky Precedent to be brought in our present Case;) and that notwithstanding three Lancastrian Kings, H. 4. H. 5. and H. 6. held the Crown successively; yet they were all declared Usurpers, or de facto Kings, by Act of Parliament 1 Edw. 4.  
And this Act of Parliament, which is in being, will outweigh your Statute in Nubibus, which was name, but not quoted in that Rebellious Message of the Lords and Commons mentioned by Knighton. You next, from p. 54. to 59. quote some much disputed Sayings out of Bracton, Fortescue, and the Mirror, as if the King were accountable to the People, and that they might take Arms against him, &c. in case of Male Administration.  
Sir, Not to enter upon the Dispute of these Sayings of theirs, which you know are interpnted far otherwise than you do, it will be objected to you, that you take the sense of our English Parliaments from others, rather than themselves; from chance Stories and Pamphlets, rather than the authentic Records, and Acts of Parliament; as if I should, for Example, quote this Book of yours for the true Sense of Abdication, against the express Words and Import of the Act of Convention, which founded the Vacancy of the Throne upon King James's Recess, not upon the Male Administration, pretended against his Ministers onely in the Pr. of Orange's Declaration; for the Law of England knows no such thing as the King's Forfeiting his Crown, nor did either Convention or Parliament touch upon that Point; for they knew there was an Act of Parliament, 14 C. 2. which declared, That it was not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King, &c. and which as well Corporations as Clergy were obliged to subscribe; and, Mr. Johnson, you will tell us whether ever you yourself have subscribed it, and how often.  
There is likewise an Act 12 C. 2. c. 30. which declares, That neither the Peers, nor Commons, nor both Houses together, nor the People Collectively nor Representatively, in Parliament or out of Parliament, nor any other Persons whatsoever, have any Coercive Power over the King of England. And 13 C. 2. That the Sword is solely in the King's Power; and that neither one nor both Houses of Parliament can, or lawfully may raise or levy any War, Offensive or Defensive, against his Majesty, &c. It was this forced the Convention upon the point of Abdication, viz. that King James did voluntarily recede from the Government,( for a Forced Recess is not said to be an Abdication,) and so left the Throne vacant.  
What you have said so severely against this, you have presented to the House of Commons, with whom I leave it, and go on a little with you to the Argument. I desire therefore to know your Opinion, whether an Act of Parliament is not the supreme Law of England; whether it may not alter the Common Law, or any former Act of Parliament? Whether it be not our fundamental Constitution, &c. If so, then the forecited Acts are Law, are Fundamentals, are our Constitution; and so are the Homilies against Rebellion, for they are confirmed by Act of Parliament; and you called it in your Julian, The next best Book to the Bible. Therefore I earnestly desire your Animadversions upon the 2d Homily against Rebellion, which if you do sincerely, will end this whole controversy; and remember, as you red it, that it is every word an Act of Parliament:  
But if you'll say that Parliaments may be mistaken, which you must, or yield absolutely to your old Foe, Passive Obedience; then I desire to know whether, upon your Scheme, you leave it to every Man to oppose the Parliament as he thinks fit, and consequently whether the Parliament be our Fundamental Constitution; for I suppose you will not consent that every man has Authority to overturn our Foundations at his Pleasure.  
I see no way you have to escape from the Authority of Parliaments, but by reducing them to their first Principles, as you suppose them, that is, to be Representatives of the People, and consequently accountable to the People, who, as you and they pretend, do empower them; and one would think that this were essential to the very nature of a Representative, as we see it in Holland, where the Deputies of their Towns and Counties are obliged to consult their Principals in all Cases that exceed their Instructions; and if they should give their Votes without the Consent and Approbation of their Principals, they would not onely be punished as Betrayers of their Trust, but their Acts made null and voided.  
An unaccountable Representative is a Boundless Thing; it is as absolute as the Grand signior; they may sell, betray, and do what they please; and all Nations, jealous of their Liberties, have been ware of granting any such Power to their Representatives, it having proved often more fatal than even a Conquest by Foreigners. In the Year 1672. when the French over-run Holland to that degree, that, as the Netherland Historian tells us, page. 39. Amsterdam itself was ready to have met the French King with the Keys of their City, if he had advanced to them, as they expected and feared. Nay, if but 4 or 5000 Horse had onely gone forward, the Historian saith, that Amsterdam, Holland, and the whole State had fallen into the Enemies hands; when the enraged mob, mad with their Misfortunes, were threatening to sacrifice their Governours; others flying where they could, and all at their Wits end; yet even in all these most desperate and deplorable Circumstances, when they were sending Deputies to treat with their Potent Enemy, and some proposed to give their Deputies full Power to make what Conditions they could, the History tells us in the same place, that the Province of Zealand, June 29. Rejected the Reasons alleged for this Commission, and protested against them, declaring it to be a thing unheard of in the Government of these Countries, to make any Plenipotentiaries,( without an arrested Instruction,) when it concerned Religion, Liberty, and the lawful Government of the Land; wherefore they disavowed this Commission as suspicious, and of dangerous Consequence.  
But the People of England trust their Religion, Liberty, &c. into the hands of their Representatives, without any Conditions, Restrictions, or Limitations whatsoever; so that if they set up the Alcoran, or Racovian Catechism; if they sell our Liberties, Money and Properties, tho' they are taken off with Offices and Bribes in the face of the Sun, and change their Note in a day's time; yet they must not be accountable but to one another, and if the mayor part( or the leading men who govern the mayor part) be taken off, then there is no Remedy by our present Constitution; they may proclaim their being Closeted, Pensioned, Officer'd, bribed, and what you will; for it must come to a Vote in the House of Commons, and there they are sure to carry it.  
When the Senate of Rome pretended to be unaccountable Representatives, the Roman Historians tell, that they sold Rome to Jugurtha, King of Numidia, a declared Enemy of Rome, and then making War upon them. Dr. Burnet, Hist. Refor. part 2. book 2. p. 291. tells us how the Spanish Gold prepared the Parliament in the Reign of Phil. and Mary, even to abolish the Protestant Religion which was then Established by Law, and to set up Popery in its place. And who knows what power Gold has had, and may have in our Parliaments? It is impossible to be sure upon the Foundation we stand.  
But if the Representatives were accountable to their Electors, they would be a little more cautious about Bribery, or any other sinister Designs; and if their Acts were to be ratified by their Principals,( as it is in Holland,) the Nation would be more secure, for, to be sure, the People will never sell themselves.  
Towards this it is necessary, and it is a necessary consequence of this, That every County and burrow should have power to change their Member of Parliament as they see cause; how else is he their Representative? What if he will not follow their Instructions? What if they know him to be bribed and taken off? This is not to make him a Representative, but absolute Lord, and Master, and Sovereign, unaccountable, Disposer of their Lives and Fortunes, their Religion, their Liberty, their Wives, Children, and Posterity.  
And pray tell me, Is not an Absolute King more eligible than this? He cannot be bribed to sell his country; for there is no Equivalent can be given to a King for the loss of his Kingdom: But unaccountable Representatives may be Bribed one by one, and there are Examples of it in all Ages, in none more than in our own.  
Secondly, Is not a King more absolute for having such Representatives, as Tools to pass all his Arbitrariness upon the People undiscovered, who bear whatever goes in the name of their Representatives, like a Burden one is used to, without complaining?  
And no King can want Money to Bribe them, because they will give Money to Bribe themselves, and the People are to ask no Questions, nor to know what is become of their Money.  
Mr. Johnson,  
The Freedom of these Thoughts I judged fittest to be communicated to you, because you set up for a Lover of your country, their Original Rights and Liberties, which if they be invaded, there is no comfort or Honour to say, It is done by their Representatives; that makes their Case more lamentable, contemptible, and incurable.  
No doubt you will improve these Hints, if you like them; if not, I would be glad to know how you will get over those Acts of Parliament which enact Passive Obedience. If we must stand and fall by Acts of Parliament, the Cause is determined against you; if you go higher, to what you call our Original Rights, I would be glad to partake of your Thoughts upon what I have said, with the same Calmness, and voided of reflections, of which I have given you an Example.  
I assure you my Design is for the good of my country, that they may be happy, and long continue so, by being settled upon true and lasting Foundations, and that they discover and avoid all fatal errors in their Constitution, and thereby escape those Convulsive Revolutions, into which they have had such dangerous Relapses in this and the last Age, that without some effectual Remedy applied, our Dissolution seemeth to draw near. To discover the Cause is the first step towards the Cure; that I have endeavoured, how justly I leave you to judge, and desire your Correction in what I have done amiss, and am,  
The second Day of January, 1692. SIR, Your humble Servant.   

POSTSCRIPT.  
March 4. 1692. SIR,  
THE Triennial Bill made me less solicitous to publish this Letter as you desired, because a Remedy did thereby seem to be provided against the Corruption of Parliament Men, so far, at least, as to give the People a Liberty to change their Representatives every Three Years. But there are a set of discontented Folks, who presume even to lay Wagers upon the Exchange, that the K. will not pass the Bill; which no Men of Sense do believe, but it does great Prejudice among the Common People, to disaffect them against the Government; as if our Deliverer designed more Arbitrary Proceedings than those we complain of in the last Reign.  
Sir, There is no Man will be more affencted with what may unhinge this Government than yourself, or better qualified to prevent so fatal a Blow as this would be to it: For the People think it no other than telling them, in plain English, that a Free Parliament must never be hoped for in this Reign, that they are afraid of such a Parliament, and that the Disease of the Nation is now without Remedy. But I need not put Arguments in your Mouth: I do by no means give the least Credit to that pernicious Surmise of Rejecting the Bill; but it is good to prevent all possible Hazards. And I earnestly recommend it to your Care; especially considering the Consequence of the late Addresses of Both Houses, which so plainly set forth the Exorbitance, Arbitrariness, and Illegality of this Government in Ireland, from the very Beginning of this Reign, as well while the King was there in Person, as since, which some make use of to overbalance all that is objected against K. James's Government, as well before as after he went into that Kingdom; which they now begin to say, has suffered much more from K. William's Administration than K. James's, even the Protestant Religion and Interest, by the great and illegal Favour to the Papists, and Oppression to the Protestants, so freely represented in the said Addresses. This prompts the Disaffected Party Here, to bring the Comparison even to England, and lay to Heart the Abolition of Episcopacy, and the violent Proceedings in favour of the Presbyterians in Scotland: And if this Bill should be Rejected, believe me, the Objections will rise very high as to this Kingdom. To prevent all which, is that, Sir, which has moved me to say all this to you; and I hope it will be to good Effect.   
FINIS.