The Case of the Allegiance 
 due to Sovereign Powers.,* 
 
 By 
 William Sherlock
 
 ■j 
 
 1
 
 THE 
 
 CASE 
 
 ALLEGIANCE 
 
 Stated and Resolved, 
 
 According to 
 
 SCRIPTURE and REASON, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 Principles of the Church of England. 
 
 A more particular Refpe(!^to the OATH, lately en- 
 joyned, of Allegiance to their prefent MAJESTIES, 
 
 K, WILLIAM ^^d Q.MAIIY- 
 
 By /^/ L L^ljiCH fHFRL~^^^^ 
 
 Malter of the Temple. 
 
 The Second Edition, 
 
 E VI ^ B \3 /BLG H^ 
 
 Re. printed for 'Mrew Ihalt^ers ai^d ^ohn Valldnzs . 
 and are ta b e Sold a: their S hops, ^nno Dom, 1691'/

 
 THE 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 TO 
 3 IS 
 
 NkJ not dcqudtnt the World nhh the Ocudon ef (Mtjl-.tng (*» 
 Vook ; vhkhtndeed is txioriedjrom me by iherude CUmonrs 
 md u«chri[iian Cenfutts oj jcme, ond iheearmf Jn-portunmes 
 
 M> taking the Oathof MUgianctto King William ani 
 Quetn Mary, «/.er/o long a Ktfujal has rccafiontd a great 
 dealoftalk, and a great many uncharitable gu.tijes about it j 
 Fcaion andblindZealni'wayes wanting eiihtr the Wit, orthe 
 
 T^^^^f i^xsi^ -^^UiiLJ good U ill, togitefs J^ig^^- l jr r- J 
 
 One wouia have ihoHgf^t it the mo(l probable ConjeBi re, That a Man, who hadjor^ttta 
 fill his preferment by refufingtheOaih, and had for ever lo (I them, had not the Govern- 
 ment been more mild and gentle in delaying the Execution oj the Law, aBedvery honeji^y 
 tindfincerelyinit; andtffo, Jhatthere^ alfo good Keafcmo believe, that tf ihe Jame 
 Verfen afterwards takes the Oath, he aHshonefily intha^oo : For what Reajon ts there 
 to fufpea, that he, who would not [wear againH the prtfent perfwafion ofht^ Conjcience to 
 leep his Vreferments, {^^ould fwear agamfi his Confcjence to get them again\ I do not knctv 
 that I have given any jt'pOccaficn to the World iomark me cidfora Dijhonep Man, era 
 Tool', Jmaybemifiaken, and fo may any Tody eife, though never fo wife and hcmjf: 
 But this I am fure of, that 1 never aRed with morefincerity in any affair of my whcle UfCi 
 thi*t ihave done m this Matter, fromtke beginning to the end -, and whether I have jufft' 
 sietftReafottforwhat 1 do, Irejer tothetrialof thiiDifcourfe. 
 
 The truth is, though I refufed to take the Oaths, I never engaged in any FaBiBn againjt 
 h: InevermadeitmyBufinefstodiffwadeMenJromit: "^ hen my Opinion was asked, 
 J declared my own Thoughts, but J never fought tut Men to wake Trofelytes. 
 
 \(lhile T thoughtit an ill thing, 1 wasfecretly concerned, that feme of my old intimate 
 Triends had taken the Oaths-, but yet as Opportunity ferved, J converfed with thofe of 
 them, ychofe 2ealhadnot made their Conver(ationuneafie, with the fame Friend/hip and 
 freedom, that 1 ufed to do: 1 believed them to be honefl Men, and that they a Bed honeflly, 
 according to the perfwafion of their own Minds and vijhed that I could have done as they 
 did. J complied with the Govtrnment, as far as J thought J could withajaje Confcience ;■ 
 I nlw^y^i livid iuiah ttndptAiuhly^ and was ready tQ bavegivtn Stmity to dofo, J fray. 
 
 ^sG438
 
 The PREFACE. 
 
 *tifof King William And QMeeftMafy hy Name, according to the .^poflles direBion, tnpnj 
 for all that are in Authority, Tphichtheyviftbly were ; though I h:ew at the fame time, 
 this highly fended fome, who refufed the Oaths, and made me fland, in a manner, ftngly 
 
 by my felf. 
 
 lalwayeioppofed a Separation, andadvifednotafeiP, who thought fit tc con fult with 
 me, to keep to the Communion of the Church 5 and not to tmertain [Prejudices again(l their 
 Minifler for taking the Oath: FofirvM len(ible of the Evil and Mifchief of Schifm 
 which fome hot Men were thenfortvard to promote , and are fo (idl 5 witnejsalate Mmphlet 
 in ^nfwer to The Reafoning part of the On.caf inaolcnefs of the New Separation, which 
 juflifies a Schifm now, uponfuth ?rinciples, a6 wottid have made all the Jews Schifmaticks, 
 Tvhen the High ?rie(}hood became Annual {though our Saviour bimfelf then Communi' 
 catedwith the Jewifh Church ) and makes the whole Gxctk Church Schifmaticks, as often at 
 the Grand Segnior changes their patriarch, 
 
 for I did not refufe the Oaths out of any fondftefs Jor the Government of King]im€S, 
 tfor^ealJorkM Return i which, the prejent profp^d of affairs gives no Man, Who loves the 
 Church of England, and the Liberties of hps Country, any reafon to wijh: Noryet out 
 of any ^verfton to the Government of King William and Qneen Mary. But againfi my 
 cwn inclinations and Interefl out of pure Vrinciples of Conjcience, to comply -with the 
 obligations of my former Oathsy and that Duty which SubjeBs owe their Prince, which I 
 ihen apprehended irreconcilectble with the new Oath, 
 
 rhpswasa dtfpofition of Mind prepared to receive fatisfaBion, when ever it was offered ^ 
 dnd to comply chearfully with theprefent Government, when etrer J could do it withafafe 
 Conjcience. J prayed heartily to God, thatiflwerein amifiake, he would let me fee it i 
 that 1 might not forfeit the Exertife of my Miniflry, for a meer mifiake : and I thank Go^, 
 J havereceivedthat fatisfaBionwhich I defired ', and if any Man € an /hew me, that the 
 Vrinciples laBonartfalfe, uncertain, or precarious, and fuch as cannot reafonaHy fatif* 
 fennhonefi and unbyaffed Mind, Iwillconfefs, that my deftre offatufaBionhas fectetly 
 and infenfiblydi(ioried my Judgement, though I took allpoftble care that it/kouldnot, 
 
 I find, the general Cry and ExpeBation is, that ijhould give my reafons ; though why 
 j/hould be more obliged to give my Keafons for Swearing, than I was for not Swearing, JT 
 cannot tell. 
 
 Some feem very fond of this, upona prefumptionthat I can fay nothing, hut what they 
 can eafily ^nfwer ; andthatwillferveto expofeMe, and the Caufe together: I have for 
 snce gratified thofe Men, that they may have the Bpportunity to fhe^v their skill. 
 
 Others, whi are very well f^tisfied them felves, have yet a Curio fity to know what fatis- 
 fed me, who have beenfo long dijfatisfied. But this was nojufl Occafion to write Keafons; 
 for if Keafons were never fo plentiful with me» lean hardly think it worth the while t$ 
 write a Book to gratifie a meer Curioftty, 
 
 There are others, who are (iill diffatisfled about the Oaths, and are deftrous to try 
 
 "Whether they can find that fat is faBion, which i have done. This, I confefs, ts agood 
 
 Reafon, which may i>i Charity obligeme-, and how haytrdoui an attempt foeveritbe-y 
 
 my dutytoGod. and to his Church, and to the Government, as well as Charity to my 
 
 brethren, feemto require it, when it isdefired, and exaBed from me: and Ihope^ futh 
 
 Hen will confidertoo, what is their Vuty, as they will anfwer it to God, and to their own 
 
 Con/ciences, to read whatl have written for their fakes, carefully, and with an honefl 
 
 Mttdi and to judge impartially ; and whatever the EffeB be, to take it kindly. 
 
 But there is another Motive has prevailed withme, more than all the refi : We live in M 
 •^It ofgrw profhannejs and infddity, which ti mdy tg takt all Qccafion to reproach Re- 
 
 ligi9n
 
 The PREFACE. 
 
 tjgioH , and expofe it, <« a Cheat and JmpoPiere, and to negUB nd OppoYtuntty ft 
 hUcken the Cleygy, as menof no Faith nor HeLgton them/elves, though they ntetkea 
 great rtoifc about .t to ferve their own Interefi; ^nd the general contpUavce of the Clergy 
 in taking this Ketv Oath, hath been improved by mnt ojthi .spirit to very till pu)po)e : ^^nd 
 not only fo, butjowe very Devout Chriflians have been greatly jenndcti.-ied arid ojjefided 
 4tit: ^nd others, who Jhould have undcrflood better, and checked t^^ ill Temper, u^hicb 
 fs ojfuch dangeroM Confequence to Keligion in general have given too much countenance t9 
 it. and have feemed too mach plea fed, to fee and hear all the Clergy that have takenthis 
 Oath, expofedtocontitnpt j diif, n hen the great Body of the Cierpy is ri icuUd -xnd 
 txpojed, the Credit of Religion could bejupyorted only by fome ferv men, who refufi 
 the Oath, Many of thent indeed, to my knowledge, are very ^reat and excellent Per] "tjs, 
 'whom 1 do from my heart Honour and Kevcretice, and whom ih^pe, and heartily pray, 
 God will refiore again to the Miniflryof hi^ Church: Vtt Xjhould beveyyforry (and jo I 
 amfure., wouldthey) that the Chnrch and Religion Jkonld be reduced jo lony, as to bs con- 
 fined to their natrbiTS-. and h^ve no firmer bottom to reft on than their iiepiiuaiion, which 
 though it be defervedly ^reat, cannot bear the -whUe weight of the Chur- h and ileligion. 
 
 Jt is time to ^ive cheek to fuch U';chri(ha}i.Ce):fnres, if we have any regard tn our Corn- 
 won Chriflianity: ^ndfince fome little "Writers among them ( who are too head- ftrcngta 
 he governed by wifer men ) engrojs the Church and KeUgicn to thentj'elves ; and reprejent 
 nil who have taken the Oaths, efpecially the Clergy , as ^^pflcates* at leafl from the 
 Church c|/£ng!and'. ijnot from the Chriifi an Faith; it is necefary to convince all jober 
 Chriflians, that men wayjnear Mlegiance to King Wiljiam and' Kli<een Mary without 
 Verjury, and without renouncing any principles of the Church of England; nay, that th^ 
 DoB'ine of the Church of £nglr.nd reqnires its to do fo : And I hope, if this uppecr, their 
 Zeal for the Church 0/ England, if no other Confideration can prevail with them, will 
 tblige them alfs to do it. 
 
 Butitfeems it will not ferve ntytufn to offer fuch P.eafons, as will juflife ny com. 
 fliance now, unlefsl cangive ageod ^eafon, whyldidnnttake theOaths bjore -, that if 
 Jmufigive fuch lleafons, as will equally prove, that no man ought to have taken the 
 t>aths before, and that they ought to tjike them now. 
 
 Theft are very hard Tash Mapers , and no doubt, have very kind Vefgns in it, to drAW 
 me in to provoke the Government by a needlefs juflification of my fflfto v hai i?pzft ; v hich 
 €Att ferve no other end, but a little Vain glory, that i would not be thought capable of a sUf- 
 take; andleflthet^^on'fwedrers/hould not be Match enough for we-. Imuft Vroclaim War, 
 and bid open Defiance to all that have taken this Oath; and prove, that they ought not /• 
 have fwern before J did , but were obliged to do it the very next minute. 
 
 But what now, if nothing of all this be neceffary \ W kit ./i was not fo wellfitisfiidah' 
 ^ut this matter before, asiamnowt Is any man forbidden to grorv wifer, and upon a care- 
 ful and thorough examination of ihirgs, to alter hts mind, when he fees go'-d reajouforit > 
 I am not ajhamed to own, that 1 am (fill a Learner; anihope. ifhullbefo as long as. I live, 
 and improve my Knowledge every day by Study and converfation 
 
 So that without producing the F eafons of my dtffatisfad "n before, or being obliged to an- 
 fwer them,havingnevermade them ?ublick,i thirk it v^ry fair to give a fa^ispHoryVeafon 
 now, for my taking of this oath; hoping, thatwh i huh fatisfiedtve, may have ihc fame 
 tffeB upon f on e others, that will have the pittien^e impartially 10 corfiderit' 
 
 I had indeed fome of theft Thoughts long fince, which I drew up in Writir'g, und/J^ewed. 
 $9 feme oj my friendsi and dtfcQHYf'ed mth others about thm, and ioidw here i fitick t but 
 
 B fii.k
 
 The PREFACE, 
 
 fficik r did, atfd could find no hilp for it 5 and there 1 had puck to thit day, had 1 Mt leen ft" 
 lieved by Bijhop Overal's Convocation Bouk,Ti /?/c/j not only confirmed my former ^Siotions* 
 and jugg^^ed fame new thoughts to me, which removed thofe Difficulties^ which^ 1 cotddno* 
 hej')ye ^onquer-^ but alfo by the VeneruhU kuthority of a Convocation, gave me grexter free- 
 dom -tnd liberty of thinking, which theapprehenfions i:-f Novelty and Singularity hstd cramps 
 td before 
 
 Thus Reader, I have made The my Confeffor, and declared my whole Ueart to The, as to^ 
 this Matter', and now judge of me, .<js ThoH would'} be judged by God another day. 
 
 I muff add one thing more : That I have renounced no ? rind pie thit ever J taught, excep» 
 iin^ one in The Ct-Xq o\ Refiftincc, which is the only material ?a(fage 1 know any reafon tf3 
 fetraBin}hatBo$k, ViZ. That"irhenSt. Paul /^jj, All Power is of God, hemcansonly 
 Legal i'owers -, but that in an Vlereditary Monarchy, where the right HezV/V living^^furp^ 
 €d ?da>ers are not 0/ God, nor the Ordinance ofGod ; as 1 proved by the Example 0^ Joafh 
 The Reafon and i he Example you will find fujficienily anfwered in the following Vifcourfe , 
 and the Dodrine it jVifrejeBed by the Convocation.though it has been of late years Jo prevaiU 
 ing dmifiake, and impofed by fuch great ^uthorities,that it is very pardonable, ejpecially 
 tvhen it is fo freely acknowledged: Though the truth is, I think (hll it is very true, at to the 
 Cafe I then had in mine Eye, viz. TheVfurpaiionso/ the Rump l^arliament, &c. bnttht 
 ^ault is, that i: fs too generally exprefied. 
 
 In managing this Argument upon the Principles 1 have laid down, it ps nece^ary to reafon 
 upon the Suppofitiono fun jufli^furpationSi and illegal Revolutions of State \ and it may 
 he \ may meet with fomefuch Readers, as may charge me jor [0 doing with rejieBing upon 
 theprefmt Government, which I am very fure I am far jrom intending to do. -^nd they wha 
 underfland what belongs to DifputesoJ this Nature, know very well that the/horte^ way 
 io bring the matter to an Ififue, is to put the Caje attheworflthat canbe fuppofed^becaufe 
 this gives fo much the greater force and advantage to the argument, when it is futedtg 
 thofe, who are mofifirongly prejudiced againff the Legality of the late Revolution: For 
 fiippojing, but not granting, them to be in the right in this matter, 1 doubt not to make it 
 appear, that it is for all that their Duty to fwear allegiance to the prefent Government, 
 tvhen required jo to do: ^nd this being clearly, proved, it becomes ttltogether niedlefst§ 
 debate the Legality pfthilmP-ivolHtiQn, 
 
 THE
 
 THE 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 SrS. T. The Car<* plainly an-^breiflyftated. That the Queftlon, Whether Allegiance 
 ._ be due to a Frincr, who is fcitlcd in the Throne, does not neceTarily involve the 
 Difpure about a I eaal Kighr. page r. 
 
 Se^..z. ThrD. dnne of the Church of E»g/d«<i in this Point; asit istaughtinBifliop 
 OveraCi, C( nv( caticn Bo( k. 3 
 
 Two things rrovrd from that Bock. i. That thofe Prinrcswho have no legal 
 Rightto their Thrones, may yet have Gjds Authority. 2. i hat when :h \ arcthr u^hfy 
 fet.Icd in their Throne, they are invtftcd with Gjd's Authority, and niut\ bercve.cnced 
 and obeyed by all that live within their Ttrr. tones and Dominions, 4, CP^p. 
 
 StB, 3. The Tcftimony of Scripture arid Reafon in this Matter ; reduced into fevcral 
 Propoficions. 7>^^> 
 
 ie5. 4 Some Reafons and Arguments urged, and Objedions Anl-Arcred, for the far. 
 ther confirmation oT this Doctrine. J2 
 
 1. That the Scripture has given us no direftion in this Cafe, but to fubmil and pay 
 all the Obedience of Subjcds to the prefent Powers. Ibul, 
 
 Whether Rom. n. i, 2. concern Legal Powers. Ibid. 
 
 2. Thisgivesthecafitftand moft intelligible Account of the Original of Hutnane 
 Government ; That all P ower is from God. i 5 
 
 Thefeveral Hypothefes about the Original of Government confidered , and Pnewa 
 
 inefFeftual to found a Right, without refolving all into the Authority of God. ibid, 
 
 ObjfH\ This makes a King lo(e his Right, by being notoriouHy injured, Anfwer: 
 
 '7 
 
 Concerning the Oa'hs of AI]<-giancc. 18; &c. 
 
 f)bjt3y This Do<^trinc makes iiimpodlblc for an injured Prince to recover his Right* 
 Anfwerfd. 21 
 
 Ohjfti. This encourages .ambitious Spirits to grafp at Crowns, ^^nfwered 22, 
 
 OhjeB, That Pyrats and Robbers have as good a Titleto our Purfe asUfurpcrsto the 
 Crown, .^nfwered. Ibid. 
 
 [ ekjjd. The Cafe of JeJ[;o/a</a*s anoi«t:ngT«4yZ», and kWWag ^thaliah. ^nfvf^red 
 
 Ibid^ 
 
 ehji^. That all iCings are not fct up by God, proved from mfu^l . ♦. ^nfwered.
 
 The CONTENTS. 
 
 3. ThisDoftrine if founded on the fame Principle with the DoArlne of Non- 
 Refiftanceand PalTive Obedience. 24 
 
 4. To deny this is to deny God's »/^uthority to remove Kings, and to fct up Kings. 
 
 Ibid, 
 
 5. It limits God's Providence in goveraing Kings, and protcfting innocent and in- 
 iurediubjtds. Wd^ 
 
 6. The neceftityorGovernment to pre{»frveHumanf Societies, proves this. 25 
 Bifhop Sattderfons Opinion about ^ubnjilTion to (Harped Powers examined. ibid 
 
 7. Thefc Principles anfwer all the ends of Government j both for the Security of the 
 Prince and Sub jcds. 28, 
 
 ^n^nlwer to a great prejudice, that thefe Principles will equally tcrvcall Ufurpati- 
 ons, with a particular rcfpcd: to the Rebellion in 640. 29 
 
 The Objedion from the Laws of the Land confidcred, and fome brief Remarks on 
 -9 late Book, cntitulcd, Tht Caje of allegiance to a Hing in Vofjepion. 3 S 
 
 THE
 
 THE 
 
 CASE 
 
 O F T H E 
 
 ALLEGIANCE 
 
 D U E T O 
 
 ^oberetgn ^otoets 
 
 3&C. 
 
 SECT, I. 
 
 The Cafe pUinly and briefly fidiedt 
 
 I H A T which has perplexed this Controvcrfie, Is the inteS 
 mixing the Difpute of Right with the Duty of Obedience, 
 ormakinethc Legal Right of Piinccs to theirThrones 
 the only Reafon and Foundation oitke allegiance of Sub- 
 jects: That Allegiance is due only tc Right, not toGo- 
 verntnent, though it can be paid only to G -veroment. 
 Many of :hofe who have writ in defence of the New Oath, 
 have fuppofcd this, that a Legal Right is necelFary ta 
 
 make Allegiance due, and therefore have endcsvoured 
 
 to juftific the Legal Right of Their prcfent Majefties : This as 1 have fliewn it to be 
 unneceffaryi foitfcems to me to be unfir to difpute the Right of Princes j a thing 
 which no Goveroment can permit to be a Queftion among their SubjifVs: And bow 
 wellfoeverfuchDifputesmaybc intended, they are certainly needlels in thisCaufe. 
 a«d fctYC only to confound it, by carrying men incQ fuch daik Labyrinths of 1 3«r
 
 '^ The Cafe of the Allegiance 
 
 and Hiftofy,?^c. as very few know how to find their way out of again ; And there- 
 fore 1 (ball not meddle with this Difpute, asbeifigboth above me, and nothing to 
 my prcfent purpofe. 
 
 'And on the other hand, thofcalfo, who refufe the New Oath, gowhollyupon 
 this Pfifltipfc, That Ailcgiartcc is due only to a Legal Right* And take away tlr^, 
 and you remove all the dirlicultics they labour under. They think , that a rightful 
 Prince only has Right ro our Allegiance. Thar though he be difpoflcfled of his 
 Throne, it ever he had Right to it, he has Rigli/: ftill i and therefore our Duty Is 
 ftillowin<»tohim, and to no other j aniour ^athsot Allegiance to him ftill bind 
 us: andtbauio other Prince, whoafcendsthe Throne without a Legal Right, has 
 Right to our Allegiance j an J that to (wear Allegiance to him, while we a re under 
 Obli<'ation of a former Oath to opr rightful Prince, is Perjury. 
 
 As^far arrknow, this isthefurnof all that can befard in this Caufe? Allowing 
 thefe Ifrinciplcs, thereisno way tofatisfle (iichmcn, but by juftifying the Legality 
 of the late Revolution. But thcfugh ma'ny thifigsafrc faid, which may make men 
 much moremodeft in the point than (om'e are j yet to Judge truly of this requires 
 fucBperfeft Skill iff I^w and Hiftory,^nd the conftitution of the EngliJhGQwcm- 
 merit, that few men are capabkof making fo plain and certain a judgment of it, 
 as to be a clear and fafe Ruleof Confcience. 
 
 ButifthePrinciplebefalfe, thcrq i? an end of the Difputc : And Subjefts have a 
 plain Ruleof Duty without underftandingLa^s and Politicks, the Intrigucsof Go- 
 vernment, the Rcyolut*^on€ of Stales^ the Difputes of Princes j^ whi«h 1 am^Owcis 
 bothfortfeiecSfnyd^ ^overnmcmsand $ubjeas. ' '" "^ ■ 
 
 lfthe1i'Alie#nccbedue, riot for the fake of Legal Right, bat Government. 
 
 If A'leplanccbedue, not to bare Legal Rightv but to the Authority of Ga^l 
 
 If God, when he fees fit, andean better fcrve the ends of his Providence by \tl 
 fcts upKings without any regard to Legal Right, or Humane Laws; 
 
 IfKinos, thus fet up by God, areinveftcdwithGods Authority, which muft be 
 obeved, and not only for wrath, bi»t alTo for confcience fake. 
 
 Ifthcle Principles be true, k is plain, that Subjeds are bonnd to obey, and to 
 -av and fwear Allegiance ' (if it be required) to thofe Princes whom God hath placed 
 and fettled in the Throne, whatever Difputes there may be about their kgal Right, 
 whenthey aretrivefted with God^s Authority. 
 
 Aiid thin it is plain, that our old Allegiance and old Oaths arc at an end, whc« 
 God has fet over us a new King.' forMrfefn God transfers Kingdoms, and required 
 our Obedience and Allegiance to a new Kh^g, he neccflarily transfers our Allegiance 
 
 *° this Scheme of Government may (^artle fome men at flift, before they have well 
 confidered it But every One at firl\ fight mufl acknowledge, that it is fo mucb 
 for the eafeandfafetyof Subrcftsinall Revolutions (which very frequently bap- 
 pen) what the generality of Mankinil, from an inward principle of Sclfpreferva- 
 don, toe always done, aird will^v^raysdo, that they have rcafontow.fh it to be 
 true%ndtobe gladrofeeitwdlprovcd ... ,^ . j « r 
 
 And this I fliall endeavour to do from the Authorny of Scripture and Rcafon^ 
 indthatlmaynotappeartobefingularin it, and ^.^^dvancc Paradoxes, 1 ibaH 
 
 SECT,
 
 duetoSovereignVowers, &c. v 
 
 SECT, II. 
 
 thi VoBrtne of the Church o/EngUnd in thh poinf, ^f.it ps. taught hBi/hop Ovctal's, 
 Convocation Book, 
 
 I Shall begin with the Doftrinc of the Church x^l England, not that I equal, much 
 lefs prefer it, before the Scripture j but becaufe Ionic, who rcfufe the Oath ,iay 
 greatftrcfson it, and upon this fcore charge their Brethren with no lefs than ^po- 
 ftafie from the Church j and pcffibly whenfucha venerable Authority ftands in 
 the Front, it wil'i prepare a kinder reception from the Reafons, which follow. 
 
 The Church of £«g/4»f^ has been very caieful to inftruft Her Children in their 
 Dutyto Princes; toobey their Laws, and fubmit to their Power, and not to re* 
 £&., though very injurioufly opprcfled j and thofc, who renounce thefe Principles, 
 renouncetheDodrincof thcGhurchof E«g/<t«^j But fhe has withal taught. That 
 ail Sovcrc gn Princes receive their power and authority from God j and therefore 
 every Prince, who isfctled in the Throne, is to be obeyed and reverenced as God's 
 Miniftcr, and not to be refifted j which direfts us what to do'in all revolutions of 
 Government, when once they come to a Settlement j andthofewho refufeto pay 
 and fweare Allegiance . to fuch Princes, whom Gcd has placed in the Throne, 
 whatever their legal right be, do as much rejcd the Doftrine of the Church of 
 ingland, asthofe who teach the refiftance ol Princes. 
 
 For the proof of which, I appeal to Bifhcp O-oewi's Ccnvocaticki Bock, which 
 contains the Afts and Canons of the Convocation begun in the firfl: Year o( King 
 J<«i««I,i6o3. and continued by .^djournmentsand Prorogations to 1610. under 
 Archbifhop Erf«f ro/if, a wife and learned man. 
 
 In Chapt. zS. The Convocation having given an Account of the various and Ir- ,- 
 
 regular Revolutions of Government, brought about by the providence of God j 
 ** who for the fins of any Nation or Country, altercih their Governments and 
 ** Govcrncurs, transferreth, fetteth up, and beftowcth Kingdoms, as it fcemeth 
 '** be(t to his heavenly wifdcm, they add thrfe remarkable word?; hnd when . 
 havingattained their ungodly deftres {whether ambitions Kings, by bringing any 
 <ountry into their SkbjeBion -^ordifloyal SubjeUsy bj their Rebellious rifing againft 
 their Kaiural Sovereigns) thej have eftablijhed any of the fame degenerate form 
 4ifGoverttment among their Veoj^U; the ^tithority either fo unjuftly gotten , or wrung 
 iy force jrom the true andUwful Poffejfor, being alvays God's Authority ( and there- 
 fore receiving no Impeachment by the wickednefs ofthofe that have it ) is ever ( when 
 Mny fuch alterations are throughly fettled) to be reverenced and obeyed, and the 
 Teeple of all forts. ( as well of the Clergy, as of the Laity ; are tg befiibjeB unto it, 
 not only for wrath, but alfo jcr Con/ctence fake. 
 
 InCan. 28^ where this Dcdrine is decreed, they take care to condemn altthofe pjge, %^ 
 wicked means whereby fuch changes of Gcvernments are made, and yet to afTert, 
 That whenever fuch Changes are anade, the Authority is Gods, and muft be 
 obeyed. **Ifanvmantherelore fhall affirm, either that the Subjcfts, when they 
 *' flbake ofFthe Yoke of their Obedience to their Sorereigns, and fctup a form 
 •' of Government among tbcmfelvcs, after their own Humours, do not therein 
 H very wickedly : or that it i$ Lawful for any bordcfing Kings, through Ambition 
 
 *' and
 
 4^ theCafeofi^llegtance 
 
 " andWalice, to invade their Neighbours: orthat the ProvMfnce'aftd Goodnefs 
 •* ofGod, in ufingof R-^belllonsani Oppreffions againftany King or Country, 
 ** doth mitigate or qualifie the Offences or anv fuch Rebels or oppreding Kings; 
 *• or that when any fu-h new Forms of GavernmeiK. begun bv Rebeliion, and 
 *' after throughly fettled, the -/Authority in th»fm is not of God .• or that any, 
 *' who live within the Territories of fuch new Governments, are notbound robe 
 •' fubjed to God's Authority, which is there executed, bur may rebel againft the 
 *' fame: or that the Teit»x in Egypt ox Bfl&>/o« might lawfully, for any Caufc, 
 *' have taken Arms againft any of thole Kings, or have offered any violence to iheic 
 *' Pcrfons, he dorh greatly err 
 
 Men may difpute any thing, but 1 know not how it was pofTIblc for the Convo- 
 cation to exprefs their fenfe plainer, that all ufurped Powers, when throughly fettled, 
 bave God's >^uthority, and muft be obeyed : So that here arc the Two great points 
 determined* whereon this wliole controverfie turns. 
 
 1. That thofe Princes, who have no legal right to their Thrones, mayyctbavc 
 God's Auchority, 
 
 2. That when they arc throughly fettled in their Thrones, they are inycftcd with 
 God's Authority, and muft be reverenced and obeyed by all, who live within thelt 
 Territories and Dominions, aswcll Priefts, as People: if thcfe propofitions be 
 true, it isaplain/fcfolurionof theCafej that ifitfhould at any time happen, that 
 the rightful Prince fhauld be driven out of his Kingdom, and another Prince placed 
 in his Throne, and fettled in the full Adminiftration of Government, 5ubjcdts not 
 only may, but muft for Confciencefake, and out of reverence to the Authority of 
 God, with which (uch a Fr incc is invcfted, pay all the Duty and Allegiance of 
 5uhjetlstohim, 
 
 w^sfor the firft, the Cafe is plain, that the Convocation fpcakes of illegal and 
 
 ufurped powers, and yet affirms that the Authority exercifed by them, is Gods 
 
 Authority and therefore thofe Princes, who have no legal right, may have God's 
 
 Authority : the wordsof the Canon are very plain and exprefs, and yet if any man 
 
 defires farther fatisfadion, that this was thejudgement of the Convocation, that 
 
 Princes, who bave no Legal Right,mayhave Gods Authority,it is very eafie to give it. 
 
 They teach. That/^eLoy^i fin advancing Kings to their Thrones; isnotkouni 
 
 Page, 40' fQ fijQjc laws, rvhkh he prefer ibeth others to sbferve, and therefore commanded 
 
 Jehu a Subjed to be anointed Kin^ oj Ifrael . q/ purpofe to pitni/h the (ins of Ahab and 
 
 Jezebel: and what he did by prophets in l/"we/, by an exprefs Nomination of the 
 
 Perfon, he does by his Providence in other Kingdoms, fetup Kings when he fees 
 
 fit, without any regard to the Right of SuccefTion, or Legal Titles For as they 
 
 ^i*)S3» telluselfewherc. The Lord both may, and is tble to overthrow any Kings or Empe» 
 
 rou^s, nottfiihflanditjg any Claim, Right, Title or Intenp, which they can challenge 
 
 to their Countries, Kingdoms, or Empires, 
 
 The Moabites and Aramites never could have a Legal Right to the Government 
 o^lfrael, and yet the Convocation afterts. That when Ifrael was in fubjcftion to 
 ^^i'>St' them, they knew, that itw as not Lawful for them ojthemjdves, and by their own 
 Authority to take ^rms againft the Kings, whojefuhjeHs they were, though indeed 
 they were Tyrants. And that it had not been lawful for Ehad, to have kiiled King 
 Eglon, had bf not btw frfi mait ^J Q9d the ](tdge, 2tmu uni Knlcr of the 
 Vfopls> 
 
 The
 
 duetoSovereignTowers.&cj f 
 
 The like, we fee, they teach of the Kings of Bgyp and Babybn, who never had a 
 Legal and Natural KighcfoGovcm l/r.e/i and the l.kc they affirmot the Four ^onar^ 
 chies which were ail violent Ufurpanunsi and the Pnncp.cthcy ground this on plain- 
 Uex^eXoaTlKn^a^ IhatG d. and his .on Icfus Chnft, rvhoCh.^,, 
 
 irul";ilL;i.«aK./e.o.:r .// ..e.'oria d,.. -7--- up Kings, as^^^-- 
 will bcftfervethe Endsof his wile Providence, ih.v^m.d, (fatthhe) theEanh, the 
 Man andtheBeaflsth^tare upon the ground, andh^vegtvenuto rvhomn pleajethme. ' 
 ^ndag4in.theVfoph,tD^mdteUethusrhatGodch.nge^^^ 
 
 hehathPoiper and b^arethlluU over the Kingdoms oj Men: th^^ hetakah away Ktngs. ^^^' ^ '^^ 
 and fttteth up Kings, and that ittv^s theGedof Heaven, rfhogaveu.to Ncbuchadncz- ^^„^. ^^^ 
 z,rfo great a Kingdom. Pe«^er, Strength, andGtory. a. then he had to Rule mth Ma. 
 jefiyandHouoptr a very great empire: in refpeB whereof, although Kings and ^rtnces 
 might have been fati^ fed with the, Tttles oj UentenantsorVtcegerentsonEarth, to the 
 Sonoi Godi yet he did communicate and impart io muchojh^s Vower, ^Mnoruy, and 
 Viznity unto them, as he wai content 10 (Hie them with his own ^me ^1 have [aid ye are 
 Gods/andthe Children oJ the modHigh And therefore we may obferve, there .sno 
 DmvSubje£ls, as fuch, owe to the moft Legal and Rightful kings, but the Co»^;of^«. 
 on aiicrts due to all Kings, whom God hath placed in the Throne, by what vidble means 
 (oever they obtained it: astoobeyand fubinittothcm, not to refift them, nor rebel a. 
 gainftthcm, to pay all Cufloms and Taxes, to pray for them, nay, to fwear Allegiance 
 
 to them, if it be required. , , , , 1. 1 t> • l l 
 
 Thusthcy teach with refpea to Alexander (and I think any Prince who gets the 
 Throne; may pretend as much Right to it, asbe) ifanyMan therefore Jha I affirm et- ^^^ 
 ther that the Jen.., gentrally both Vrie(is and People were not the SubjeBs of Alexander. ^,^, ,^^ 
 ajterhis^uthoritywa. fettled amongH them, ^ '.hey had been before the Suhje^s of thi ^ 
 Kings of Babylon 4«t/ Pe» da i or that they might lanfuUy have bom ^1 ms againfl htm j ; 
 
 iir thai they were not all bound to pray jer theUngtife and Vrofpenty.bothoj Aiexandei- 
 andhisEmpire, astheyhadbeenbefore to pray for the Life and Proiperttyofthe other fatd 
 Kings, and thetr Kingdoms, while they lived under their Suhje^ion'. orconfeque„tlyjhat 
 they might ta-wfully, upon any occafion whatfomever, have offered Vt9ien:eandDe{iri<at' 
 en, either to their ?erfott5, or to their Kingd$ms.Jcc. heioth greatly err. 
 
 Thus Can, 3^', they teach. That wbucrer affirms, That the ]ews were not bound,bGtb ^^^g^c 
 to have paid their Tribute, and to have prayed for Caefar without dislmulation , fincerely 
 tmd truly, nof withfianding any prett,nce of Tyranny, which they had wilJuUy drawnupon 
 their own heads, brofanycaufey^batfo^ver; or that fuch oi curfei Cx^^x, (their thtef 
 Governour) did not thereby deferve any corporal punifkment, which f^ due tobetnfli5ied 
 upon fuch Traitors; or that the Kebellion agatnfl any King, ^bfolute Vrmce, orCtvtl 
 hlagiHrate, fir any caufe what foever. Httot afindetefluhle inthe fight of God, &c. he 
 
 doth greatly err. . , ,, . r r jt- 
 
 Chapter iA- they condemn the Vbarifees y who when Uerod upon occafion caufedhts fage79*' 
 Subjects to bind themfelves by Oath, ^bd non deceffuri effent h fide CP- officio, reffedto 
 takethatOath, And in their Hth. Canon they teach : That ifanyMan^ffirm, That the VafcZ.z, 
 fharifees in refufing to bind their allegiance and Faith to Catfar, by an Oath did not there. ^ 
 
 hyfhe'X'i themfelves traiteroujly affeBed towards him (which cvidentiy is Rot true of all. 
 who may refufe fuch Ojrh, but'the intention is only to condemn fuch a retufal ; ) or that 
 
 it was not a feditiotn DoBrine T« rejuje all Taxations injpofed by the Romans, their 
 
 Uwful Magiflmts and mhtt to yM thtin to pay any TtibHte to thm, 5cc. h doth great.
 
 fi ■ The Cafe of the i^lk^mnce 
 
 In th? Cafe Wcf/fs (wearing ftlWgiance iot>mm, they condemn 'chofe, who fay, 
 r^^ 30. That liM\x^ thi High.Vrkfi did stmifshhiniinghis allegiance to KingDMiius by Oath*, 
 ^S'^S' e; that he had not finned, if he had' nhjed {being thereunto required) to have jxvorn. 
 And yer in the very next r^nb»,'^hich 1 have already quoted, ihcy reach, That both 
 Priefls and People (and therefore ]addtPsh\mCt\ii became as much the Sui>jc<5lsof ^/f%- 
 ander, as they ha.ibctnoi^t>dYiks ^ dnd then according to this DcftiMicy if ^iexundtf 
 had required anOatnbf J^lU'gtance{\oni](iddti4, (^sk h probable he did) J.W<^/^ had 
 iinned, if he had refufed thi3t Oath, though according to all th- Circumftaiic^ oi the 
 5rory, V>arimwzsthtnWmq.y to whom. krfi/^ had before fwom Allegiance. 
 %e6^. Biuit willbeobjedlcdagainftthis. that the Convocamn takfs notice of that Anfwcr 
 
 ^addit4 gave to Alexander, when he fent to him from Tyre , after the Overthrow of Da- 
 rirify That hejhoiildasfifl him in his Wars, and become Trthntary to the MsiQcdonlanSf at 
 he had been to the Perfians : He returned for his ^nftver. That he might not yield to this, 
 hecaufe he had taken an Oath fii^ his true i^llegiance to Darius, .mhichhe might not UrvjuU 
 ty violate, ti'hile Da^m lived; being by flighfefcaped, when his ^rmy^va.sdtfcomfited, 
 , ^ . But wemayebfcrve, that'the Co»z;octffiotf in their C<iko» upon it,, takes no notice, 
 ^ ^* tnatjrftii.'^ having fworn to D4r/«^, could norfubmit, or fwear to any other Prince, 
 while D«i}7«j lived 5 and iris plain, Tit^iz^ himfelf did not mean this by it, for he irn- 
 medi.ne]y fubmitted to Alexander, as foon as he came to ^erHfalem, before he had given 
 the lafl fatal Overthrow to P^nW, when D^y/Vw in bis flight was murdered by his own 
 Servants. The meaning then of ]addm's Anfwer to Alexander, was no more but this s 
 Thar he having (worn Allegr^nce to Darim, could not nrake a voluntary dedition of 
 fiimfcHto Alexander, which was the thing defired ; but when he was in Alexander's 
 Power, (which made it a mittcr of force, not of biS own choice) he made no fcruplc 
 to(\xbm\\itc\ ^^Aexander, and become his Subjed and Tributary, as he formerly was the 
 fworn Subjcftof D.tym. 
 
 Ihis, f think, fufficiently proves the firft thing , that this Co«'z;ow//o» taught, that 
 Princes, who have no Legal Right to their Thrones when they are placed there by God,, 
 areinvcfted with God s Authoritj', and m'uft be reverenced and obeyed by all Subjeds, . 
 in as full a manner, as any other the mofl legal and rightful Prince can challenge. 
 
 2dlyy The only enquiry then is, what the Convocation means by the Government's 
 feeing throughly felled. A Prince, who is throughly fetled in bis Throne, has God's Au- 
 thorify, and inuft be obeyed \ but when is bis Government throughly fetled ? 
 
 Nowhercitis, that men may impofeup&n themfelves, ifthey.will, and if they think 
 it their Intertd to do (o y and may makt as little or as much go to a through fettlement,,. 
 as they pleafc j forthe Convocation has not determined the bounds of it : they thought 
 this a vifibk thing, that every Subj<-'<n: could fee, when the Government is fo fetled, asto 
 Mike our Obedience due and necefTary> and therefore there was no need of defining,. 
 v/hat ir is to be throughly fetled : When the whole adminiibation of Government, ^nd. 
 the whole power of 'the Nation isin the handsof thePrince; when every thing is done 
 in his Name, an ^ by his Authority j whentheEftatesof the Realm, arid the great Bo-, 
 dy of the Nation has fubmitted to hihi, and thofe who will not fubmir, can be crufhcd< 
 by him, when ever he plcafes; if this be not a fetled Government, I defpairof ever 
 knowing what it is 5 for there is no Government In the World fo fetled, but that by 
 feme unfeen Accident, or by greater Force and Power, it may be unfctlcd ; and in this 
 lenfeitisimpofliblcevertokncw, when a Government is fetled; for no Government: 
 IS, or can be thusfctledagalnit ail events r but then the Government is vifibly (ctlcd„ 
 when the fam^ has ihfi M aod pcrf^Adminiftwion ot all Affairs relating to kn Kingr.
 
 dm to Sovereign Towers, 8cc, 
 
 Buriftheoeneral{ubmi(Tion of the People fertle a Governire nt, lam Aire, that is 
 cafilycnougMinovMi, when a Nation has fubmirred to aPiincc; but this will not be al- 
 lowed us, tlvit rhc fubmilfion of the /'eople fetfles the Gcvernmcnt, unlefs the Prince, 
 who has the Right ro Govern, fubmitalfo ; burl would gladly hear a good Pvcafonfet 
 this: ThefubmiiTionot the Prince indeed may be thought neceflary to transfer a Legal 
 Right; bur the rubmilTI^n of the People, ot itfelf, is fufficicnc to fettle a Governmenr, 
 and when it ii(. tied, then it isthe Aurhoritv of God, whatever the Humane Right be. 
 
 This I take to be the true fenfe of thjs Convocation conceining Obedience to 5overeii^n 
 Powers; ail Sovereign Powers, whofe ^owcr andGovcrnmcm b throKghly fetkd,mii(t 
 be obeyed, whatever their Lesal Right be ; for they have the Autfiority 'of God, to 
 which our Obedience and Subjef^ion is due, and that fupcrcedes all farther enquirie?,- 
 This is a good Argument from Authority, and asgood Authority as can be urged to the 
 Members of the Chuich of England -, for if a Co«T;flc<t//V» cannot declare tbejudament 
 of the Church of £«g/a»</, 1 know not whence we fh.ill learn it. 
 
 Bur 1 will not rely only upon Authority, but I thinkfo grei^t an Authority, ifltdcnot 
 determine our ji^cignrcnt, ought at !e?ft to make us more carefully and impartially to 
 examine the Reafon of things, and to deliver us from the Tyranny of prepofltfflon and- 
 Prejudice; and to that I proceed. 
 
 SECT. III. 
 the TfPimeny Of Scripture rfw^iRe^fon/K ihps matter- 
 
 THa? which we are to prove, is, Thatall Soveraign Princes, who are fettled in their 
 Thrones, are placed thereby God, and invtftcd with his v^utliority, and therefore 
 mufl be obeyed by all SubjcfVs, as ttie Mini&eisof God, without enquiring into their 
 Legal RightandTitlc to the Throne: The prcofsof this from Scripture aud Reafon 
 muu neccflarly be interraixt and interwoven with each o^her, and to fet this matter in 
 asdearaLightasI can, Ifhali reduce the whole into fome plain Propofitions. 
 
 Tro^. 1- Thataii Civil Power and Au:horityis from God; tor he is the Supreme 
 Xord «f the World, and has thefole Right to Govern his Creatures, and therefore no 
 man can have an} Authority butfiomGod: this will be readily acknowledged by all, 
 ivhobelieve, that thercisaGod, and that he made and Guvcms the World. 
 
 Pro/?. 2, That Civil Power and Authority is no otherwifc from God ; then as he 
 gives this Power and Authority to fome particular Perfon or Perfons, to Govern others: 
 For Authority belongs to a Perfon, and that Powerand Authority, which any Perfon 
 cxercifes, is not from God, which God never gave him : Ifhe Governs without receiv- 
 ing his Perfonal Authority from God, he Governs without God's Aiithority. 
 
 Itake notice of this to prevent a ccmraouEvafion, that all Power is faid to be o/God, 
 Becau'c God has iaftitured Civil authority ; not that every one, who exercifes this --^u- 
 tbo'Mty, receives it from God . 
 
 . But what rhcy mean by the Inflitution of Civil Authority, I cannot tell, unlefsitbc 
 that God mtrnde-l, that Mankind fhould live under Government : but this does nor 
 prove, that al! power and >^ut ority isfromGod, unlefs thofe, who exercife thisAu- 
 riionry, receive it from God : anditisplain, that St. Pattl, Kom, 15, 7, by theH/;£;/;er 
 Vowers, 2nd all potper, means thofe, who cxercile this Supreme Power, thatall (uch 
 SoYCfcignPsinwjar^ittup by God, and rccciy* their v^vubgrityfroo) bim 5 they are the-
 
 8 The Cafe of the Mejfiance 
 
 ^uUr!, V, 5. theMiniflersofGoi, who bear the Sword, w.^. indlnStVeter, theKing 
 as Supreme, i,?ety 2, i?. 
 
 Vrop, 3. There arc but three wayes whercbv God gives this Power and ^inhoriry to 
 any Pcrlons: Either by Nature, or by an txprefs Nomination, or by the difpofais o 
 Providence. f 
 
 By Nature: Parents have a Natural Supfnoriry over their Children, a ad arc thclc 
 Lords and Govsrnours too ; This wasthe fiift Government in the World, and is the 
 only Natural Authority ; for in propriety of fpeaking, there is no Natural Prince but a 
 Father, But by what boundsthis paternal and Patnarchical Authority was limited, we 
 cannottellj how the extent of their power was ftinted, and where new Families, and 
 new Governments began; and it is in vain for us to enquire after it now. 
 
 By a particular Nomination . God made Kings only in ]evt>ry, and entailed the King- 
 dom ofjudah upon David's Poftedty : and after the Divifion of the ^' en Tribes from the 
 Kingdom ot Jndaht by cxpref* Nomination Cct}erchoam and Jehu over the Kingdom of 
 Ifrael. 
 
 But God ruled inall the otker Kingdoms of the florid, as well as in ]ewrj, and all 
 other Kings ruled by Gods Authority, as well as the Kings of J«<f«iA and l/rae/ who were 
 advanced by his Command : for the moft high ruleth in the Kingdom oj men, and giveth 
 it tOTphomfoever hewill, andjettethnffoverittbebafeflojwen'y Dan. 4 '7. Jtivjtsthe 
 God ofHeaven, that gave t^ehnc\-A<iQezzAr a Kingdom, Power, and Strength, and Glo- 
 ry. It is he, that changeth tines afidjeajons,, that removeth Kings andfetteth up Kings, 
 Dan, 2, 21, 37. andthePiophecyofthe/owr Aio«<irc^/e5isadcmot^rationolir. 
 
 But now God governs the refl of the world, removeth Kings, andfetteth up Kings,' 
 ©nly fey his providence j that is, then God fets up a Ki ng, when by his Providence he ad- 
 vances him to the Throne, and puts the Sovereign -Authority into his hands j then he 
 removeth a King, when by his providence hethrufl^ him from his Throne, and rakes 
 the Government out of his hands: For providence is Goos Government of the World by 
 an invifibk influence and power, wherebvhe Direfts, Dcterm nrs. Overrules all E- 
 ventstothcaccomplifhmentof hisown will and Counfels, indiltindion from his more 
 vifiblc Government by his Ortfc/cj a nd Pyo/»^f/^, or the express figmflcations of his will, 
 as he in former ^ges governed ifrael. 
 
 Nor does it make any difference in this Cafe to diflinguifh between what God permits,' 
 and what he does,- for this dif^inction does nor relate to the £vents of things, but to the 
 ft^ickediaefs of men ,• which is the onlv reafon for thij diftinftion j For the Scripture never 
 fpeaksaf God's bare permiflion of an\ £vf nts,but makes him the Author of ill the good or 
 cvi' which happens either to private perfons, orpublick Societies. The fvents of all 
 jihings arc in his hands, and are ordered and difpoffdby his will and Counfel. asthey 
 cnu{tbeifGod}»overnsthf World: But God canno*^ be the Author of any wickednefs, 
 cannot infpirc men with any wi.ked Counfels or Dcfi^ns, nor incline their wills to the 
 Ccmmiflionof it, and therefore this we fay God only permits; but when it comes to 
 action, be over-rules their wicked defigns toaccomplifhhisown Counfels and Decrees 5 
 and either difappoints what they intend, or gives fuccefs to them, when he can ferve the 
 ends ofhis providence by their wiikednefs: And herein confifts the unfcarchabk wifdom 
 pf providence, that God brings about his own Counfels bv the free Mimftricsofmen: 
 He permits men to do wickedly, but all Evi-nts, which are for the good or evil of private 
 men, orpublick Societies, are ordered by him, as the Prophet declares, ^m9S. 3t 6« 
 SiiihhercksvilhaQity, andtkLQrdhfithnQtdgnnt^ ,
 
 ^ue toSoveretgnTowers, Sic, ^ ^ 
 
 An(jyct if there wtrc any fuch dift inftton as this, that fomc £vcnts God only permits, 
 tnd fomc be orders and appoints, wc ought in rcafon to afcribe the advancement of King« 
 to God's Decree and Counfd, becaufc it is the principal Ad of prc;videncc, which has fo 
 great an infliaence upon the Government oftheworld; andifhc decree and orderany 
 Events, certainly he peculiarly orders fuch Events as will do moft good or n,oft hurt to 
 the world. He muft with bis own hand immediately dired the motions of the great 
 wheels of P rovidence j and not permit them to move as they picafc thcmfcl vcs. tfpe* 
 cially when we remember, that Kings arc God's Miniftcrs and Lieutenants, and are in- 
 vefted with his Authority: Now to give Authority to any perfon, does not fianifieto 
 permit him to take it } and we cannot but think that God will excrcife a particular care 
 and providence in appointing his great Minifters. No man can have God's Authority^ 
 but he to whom it is given;; anditthe advancementto the Throne invcils fuch a Prince 
 with God's Authority, then God gives him the Throne, and does not mecrly permit 
 bimtotakelt; for no man can take God's Authority, but it muft be given. 
 
 Nay, fince God makes Kings now, not by an exprcfs Nomination of any Perfong, but 
 only by the Events oC Providence, wemuft not allow, that God arany time permits men 
 to make themselves Kings, whom he does not make Kings; For then we can never 
 diftinguidi between Kings by the pcrmiffion and by the appointment of God, between 
 God'sKings. and Kings of their own making; unlcfsall Kings arefct up by God, and 
 iuvcfted with his Authority, we can never know what Kings have God's Authority, 
 whothofeare, whom wemuft obey out of Confcicnce, and whom we muft not obey: 
 Thcrcisnodiredionhowtodiftinguifhthem, and the Events of providence in placing 
 them in theThione, are the fame in both 
 
 Now the necedary Confequence of this is, that by what means foevcr any Prince aJ 
 fccnds the Throne, he is placed thereby God, and receives his Authority from him. 
 There arc very diftercntwayes indeed, whereby this isdonc; fometimesby the f-Icdion 
 of the people; fometimesby Conqueft ( which has been the vifible Original of moft 
 Governments) and when any Family is thus advanced to the Throne, it is continued by 
 SuecefCon and legal Entails J butall thcfe waycs, or any other, that can be thought of, 
 are governed and determined by the Divine Providence, and the Prince thus advanced 
 is as truely placed in the Throne by God, as if he had been rxprefly nominated, anda- 
 nointcd by a Pro/rfee/ at God's command, zsSaul and David were. Somefmcs God 
 leaves a free People to choofe their ownKing, and then he direfts their choice to fuch a 
 perfon as he will make King. Sometimes he fuffers an afpiring Prince to invade and con- 
 quer a Country, but he never fofFers him tc afcend the Throne, b«^t when he fees fit to 
 make him King. Sometimes be not only places a (Ingle Perfon in the Throne, but en- 
 tails it on his family by Human Laws, and makes the Throne a legal Inheritance j but 
 when he fees caufe lor it, he interrupts the Succeffion, or finally transfers the Kingdom 
 to another family. 
 
 Trop, 4, All Kings are equally rightful with refpeft to God.* Forthofearc all right* 
 fnl Kings, who are placed in the Throne by God, anditisimpoflible there fhould be a 
 wrong King, unlefs a man could make himfclf King, whether God will or not. The 
 whole Attthority of Government is Gods, and whoever has Gods Authority is a true and 
 rightful King; for he has the true and rightful Authority of a King ; and if all Kings who 
 are fettled and cftablifhcd in their Thrones, arefet upby God, and havehis Authority, 
 with rdpcft to the Authority which they have from God, they arc righiful Kings. 
 
 Vrop, 5. The diftinftion then between a King </ey«re; andaKmg<ifya^, rclateson- 
 )ytoHurRancLaw5> wbicb bind fubje^s^ butarenoubenccciTary Mksjind Mcafures 
 
 I of
 
 la Hhe Cafe of the Allegiance 
 
 of theDivin: ?i'ovidence. In Hcrediiary Kingdoms, He is arightfui King, who -feas 
 by Siicw^onaTegal Rightto the Crown j and be who has poleffion of the Crown, 
 without a legal Right, is a King^fe/a^oj that is, is a King, but not by Law : Now 
 Subjects arc fotieil up by the Conftitutions of the Kingdom, that they muft not pull 
 down nor fct up K;ngs contrary to the Laws of the Land j but God is not bound by Hu- 
 tu sne Laws, but can make whom he pleafes King, without reg.^rd to legjl Rjghts, aad 
 when hedoesfo, iheyaretruc, though not legal Kings, itthofe arc true Kingswha 
 haveGods Authority. 
 
 Pro/?, 6 We can have but one King at a time: Two rival and oppofice Princes carjr 
 not at the fame timepjlTefstiic fame Throne, nor can Subjcftsbc bounito twooppo- 
 iite and contrary Allegiances j torrfimancanfervetrpoMafiers; and yet Allegiance is 
 due to a King by the Laws ofGud, and to every King whofc Subjcifls we are, that if* 
 wecouid have two Kin;^s, we muft have two Allegiances. 
 
 2rop. 7. He is our King who is fettled in the Throne in the a£^ual adminiflrationof 
 Sovereign Power: For /i:/w^ is the Name of Powerand Authority, not oFmeer Right. 
 He, who has a legal Right to the Crown, but has it not, ought by the Laws of the Lani^ 
 to be King, but is nut : but he, who is adually Certlcdin the Adminiftration of the Regal 
 Power, is King, and has God's Authority, though he have not a legal Right. 
 
 But the Objcdion againft this is, That it is Hobbifm, that Dominion is naturally an- 
 nexed to Power j butth'. lewbofay this, do not underf^and Mr, Hebhst or me: For 
 Hemakes Power, and nothing elfe, to give Right to Dominion j and therefore alTerts, 
 ThatGodhimfelfis the Narural Lord and Governour of the World, not becaufc he 
 made it, but becaufe he is Omnipotent; but 1 fay. That Government is Founded in 
 Kight, and that God is the Natural Lord of the World, becaufc he made it j and that no 
 Creaturehas any Right t)G:»vern the World, or any part of it, but as he receives Au- 
 tljority from God : And therefore fincc Power will Govern, God Co orders it by his Pro- 
 vidence, as never to intruft Sovereign Power in any Mans hands, to whom he does not 
 give the Sovereign Authority : That power does not give Right and Authority to Go- 
 vern, but is a certain fign to us, that where God hath placed and fcttleel the Power, he 
 has given the Aa^hurlty. 
 
 Vrop, 8 Allfgianceis dueonlytotheKIng.' For Allegiance fignifies all that Duty, 
 which Sub) ds owe to their King, and therefore can be due to none but the King, 
 
 It then he who has the Legal Right may not be our King, and he who has not> may ^ 
 when an vfuch Cafe happens, we muft pay our Allegiance to Ijim who isKing, though 
 without a Legal Right j not to him who is not our King, though it his the Right to be fot 
 And the reafon is very plain, becaule Allegiance is due only to God's Authority, not to 
 a bare Legal Title without God*s Authority j and therefore muft be payed to him who is 
 invefled with God*s Authority, who ishis Minifler and Lieutenant j that is, to the 
 Adual King, who is fettled in thcThrone, and has the Adminiftration of Government 
 . in his hands 
 
 0bj5^ But if this be To, what does a Legal Right Hgnifie, if it do not command the ' 
 Allegiance of Subjeds? 
 
 ^w/jf, lanfwer: Itbarrsall other Human Claims: Noother Ptince can. challenge 
 the Throne of Right: and Subjedsare bound to maintain the Rights offuch a Prince, 
 asfar as they can j that is, againft all Mankind, but not againft God's difpofal ot 
 Crowns: and therefore whenGod transfers the Kingdom, he transfers our Allegiance, 
 which is due, and anncxcdto his Authority, whether this Awbomj be fQnvcj'cdby a Legal 
 SuccefiiioB, orfcy aoyoihcrn«as3s.
 
 due to SoveretgnVowers, &c it 
 
 0i;>5. But If wehavefworn Allegiance tofuchaPrince, and his Htirs, andlawful 
 SuccefTors, how can we pay Al'eoianccto any otherPrince, while He, or any of his 
 Heirs, and Legal Succcifors 'arc living, and claim our Allegiance, without violatingour 
 Oaths? 
 
 ^nfiv. lanfwer: An Oath of Allegiance made to any King, can oblige no longer 
 than he contirucs to he a King i briMrdii^, it would oblige us againfl: our Duty, and 
 fo become an unlawful Oarh : for our Allegiance is due to him who is King, in the aftual 
 and fctlcd pc fleflion of the Throne, and therefore muft by the Law of Gjdbepaid 
 there; and chf^n it cannot be paid to the difpofreflcd Prince , unlefs we can have two 
 Allrgianccs: Our Oath then to the difpcflcded Trince ccafcs , Ctffante materia ^ for 
 though the Man is in Being ftill, the Kingi' gone. 
 
 Bur we fwear to mainrain and defend his Right, and the Right of his Heirs: butyet 
 we do not fwear to keep them in the Throne, which may be impofliblc for usto doa- 
 gainft a profperous Rebellion j nor do wc fwear in Cafe they arc thrown out of the 
 Throne, never to fubmit or pay Allegiance to any other Prince \ which would be an un- 
 iaw'ul Oarh, as contrary to that Duty we owe to the Divine Providence in making 
 Kings, and removing Kings. The Oath of Allegiance contains the Duty of Sub/ccls 
 to their King, and can txrend no farther, and therefore can oblige no longer than he i& 
 OurKifig, fn^wehis Subjects. 
 
 Thefe feemtome, to be very plain Trepoftiens t and to carry their own Fvidence 
 with them; and if this be true, it is a very plain Direftion to Subfeds in all the Revo- 
 lutions of Government. 
 
 Themofl thatcan beexpeftcd from them , according to the ftrl£Veft principles of 
 Loyalty and Obedience, is to have no hand in fuch Revolutions, or to oppufe thtm as- 
 fa.- as they can, and not to be hafly and foreward intheir Compliances ^j but when fuch a 
 Bevolutir n ismade, and thev cannot help it j they muft reverence and obey their New 
 Prince, asinvi'f^cd with God*s Authority. 
 
 Nor is it very hard to know, when our Obedience becomes due to a New Prir^ce ; for 
 If doesnotcopfift in a Mathematical point, ncf require Mathematical certainty: Our 
 Obedience is due to God's Authority, and when we can reafonably conc'ude, that God 
 hasmadehin-King i that is, when the Providence of God has fctlcd him in the Throne* 
 we muft pay our Obedience to him* 
 
 There a. e different degrees of Settlement, and muft neccflari'y be in fuch new Go- 
 vernmenrs, whichfeemtome to require different degrees of Submifflon, or at leaft to 
 juftifie f hem, till it increafes to fuch a full andplcnarv and fettled pcflcfTion,as requires oue 
 Allegiance, as being notorioufi) evident and fcnfible to all that do not wink haid, and 
 will not fee ir. 
 
 If the generality of the Nation fubmit to fuch a Prince, and place him on the Throne, 
 and put the whole power of the Kingdom into his hands, though it may be, we cah- 
 oot yet rhjnk the Providence of God has fettled him in the Throne, while thediPpofTcfled 
 Prince has alfo fuch a formidable power, as makes the Event very dcubtful, yet if we 
 think fitoconrinuein the Kingdom, under the government and power of the nev 
 Prince, tht-rc are feveral Duties, which in reafbn we ought to pay him. 
 
 As to hvc quietly and peaceably under his government, andto promife, orfwear, or 
 
 give any other fccuriry that we will do fo, if it be demanded : Itisreafonable we fbcuM 
 
 dofo, if wethinkitrcafonableto live under this protedion of the government j this^ 
 
 all men do in an Enemies quarters, and no manbbmcs them for it, 
 
 -t. Veixjuftp^y Taxes to tbcHi, foithcteor^dnttoibiAdmini^ratiottof government.
 
 ,2, The Cafe of tyillegtance 
 
 ds St. fAvX obfcrvcs ; F^r thU catife pay ye Tribute alfo, fat they dre the MmijierfofGed, 
 attending eontinually on thii very thing, Rom. i ?. 6. And \{ we owe our fccurc poffeP- 
 (Ion of our Eftatcs to thcprotedion of a govcrnmenr, let the govcrnaaem be what it 
 will, we ought to pay for it. 
 
 We muft give the Title of Kitig to fuch a Prince, when we live in the Country where 
 he is owned for King; forbefidestharitisapiece of good manners (which is the leaft 
 thing we can owe to him, under whofe government we live) he is indeed King, while 
 be adiuiniftersthe Regal power, though we may not think him fo well fettled in his go- 
 vernment, as to all intents and purpofcs to own him for our King. 
 
 Nav, wcmuft pray for him under the Name and Title of King, for we are bound to 
 pray for all who are in Authority j and that a Prince is, who has the whole government 
 inhishands, and has power to do a great deal of hurt, or a great deal of good j and this 
 isfo far from beings fault, that it is a duty, while wc take care to do it in fuch terms, 
 as not to pray againft the difpofTcflt^d Prince. 
 
 Thusfarl think rbcdoubtfulpolTcdion of the Throne obliges us, and it were very hap- 
 py if no more were required in the beginnings of fuch a new government ; but when be- 
 fides the poffelTion of the Throne, thcpower of the difpofTcfred Prince is broken, and no 
 Tiiibleprofpedofhisrecoveringhis Throne again j nay if itbc vifiblethat he can never 
 recover his Throne again, bur by making a new Conq ucft of the Nation by Foreigners, 
 who will be our Mafteis, if they Conquer, and no very gentle ones neither j wc may 
 tben look upon the new Prinec as advanced and fettled by God in his Throne, and there- 
 fore fuch a K'ng, as we owe an entire Obedience and Allegiance to. 
 
 For we muft not take the confideration of Right into the fettlement of Govcrnimcnt jfor i 
 a Prince may be fettled in his Throne without legal Right, and when he is fo, God has \ 
 made him our King, and requires our Obedience. 
 
 Thefe principles are fo very ufeful, efpecially in all Revolutions of government, that 
 Subjefts have great reafon to wifh them true, and toexaminc over again thefe ftriA j 
 principles of Loyalty, which if purfned to their juft confequences, muft unavoidably in | 
 fome Jandurcs, facrifice whole Kingdoms, at leaft all Subjefts who pretend to this 
 degree and kind of Loyalty and Confcicnce, to the ill Fortune of their Prince. 
 
 SECT. IV. 
 
 SotmTieafonntnd Arguments nrged, and objeHions anfwered,fir the jmher Conftma^ 
 iion of this DoBrine, 
 
 THat we may examine this more impartially and more fecurcly xely upon the Diftatcs 
 ofReafon in this matter, lobfervc. 
 I, That the Scripture has given us no Directions in this Gafej but to fubmit, and pay 
 all the Obedience of Subjeds to the prefent powers, it makes no diftindion, that ever 
 I could find, between rightful Kings and Ufurpers. between Kings whom wc muft, and 
 whom wc muft not obey i but the general Rule is. Let every Soul be fubjeB to the higher 
 Voivers, for all power is 0/ God the lowers that be are ordained of God : whof^ever 
 therefore reffleth the TotPer, refilieththe Ordinance of God, and they that reftH /hallre-i 
 feive to themfehes damnation, Rom. i M , 2, To fay the ^poftle here fpeaks of law- 
 ful powers, is gratis diBum, for there is no Evidence of it: The Criticifm betwccrt 
 l|»Wj6 and ^M»w«f willnotdoj for they both fignificih^ fame thing in Scripture, d. 
 ~ ibi^
 
 due to Sovereign Towers, &c i j 
 
 thfr force 3hd power, or authority; Lk \ya tlnnm^-^oif^t -Jsn v^di t infill Hdt ht 
 brought under the potPtT of any thing, mulKignific force, i Coy. 6 i2. and IJ»dCu«; muft 
 fignifie authority and dignity , Efh»\. zu vo'i^xve* ^oijy.s ^^ .J^-,. k. i^ioia^ti^ ^u» !fx,iA9 
 t^ y-u^icrnl^^ which are feveral names and degices of di^oicy and auciioncy, asweilas 
 power, Kpe^^jCar and i^it^lxZ^Hi fignifie the fame thing, the exercifc of civil aurho- 
 thority and power, Luke 22, 25. andtier:forc eci iianect are the ei ^%^rix.(^c^7ii, 
 thole who exercifc authority and dominion j the ci •c^^tKrij, the Rulers, v. 3. ths 
 MiniftersojGod, which bear the Sword, v. 4« In 5t. Pe^er, the Bic^.a^oV and ny^f 
 fii, theKing, andhisGovernoursand MagiilfatcS, 2 x^?.'f.- 2. 13, 14. Nowthercmay 
 be K-ings and Emperours and Rulers, who exercifc civil government without a legal 
 Title to it, in the fenfeof the Objedors, yet St.?aul has made no Exception againft 
 tbemj butif they be the Powers, if they exercifc the Supreme Authority , they are of 
 God, and are the Ordinance of God: ioVTrxjx el^strixis yro'silartx^an ; which evi- 
 dently relates to the Exercifc of Civil Authority, not to a Legal Right. And why fhould 
 wethink the ^/?o/?/e here intends a diftindion unknown to Scripture: had there beers 
 any fuch Rule before given, to fubmit to lawful powers, but not tofubmittoHfurpers, 
 there had been fomeprctence for underftanding St. haul's ^U power of all legal power 5 
 but there being nothing like this any where clfe in Scripture, it he had intended any fuck 
 dii\indion, he ought tohavefaid it inexprefs words, or clfe no body could reafbnably 
 baveunderftood him to intend this precept of fubjedion to the higher powers, only of 
 powers that had a legal Right. For then, in order to the fulfilling of this precept, it 
 would be neceflary for Subjcds to examine the Titles of Princes, and to that end to be 
 wcllskili'dinthe HjfloryandLawsof a Nation, and to be able to judge between a pre- 
 tended and real Right , and to know exaftly what gives a real Right ,• that they 
 may know to whom they ought to pay fubjcdion, and may not mifplace 
 their duty in fo important a matter, A.nd let any man judge in what perplexi- 
 ties this fenfc of the Apoftles precept would involve the Confcicnces of men: for 
 thele are great difputes among learned men, and how then fhould unlearned men un- 
 derfland them J And 1 caBnot think that the refolution of Confciencc, in fuch matters 
 as a41 Mankind arc concerned in , fhould depend upon fuch Niceties as learned men them- 
 felves cannot agree in. Efpecially if we confider the Cafe of the Roman Empire, in which, 
 for fo many Ages together, the Titles of their £raperours were either all of themftaik 
 ■ought, or the very befl of them very doubtful. And yet thisEpif^le to the Romans 
 was written to the Subjeds of that Empire to direft themin the pcint of fubjcclion and 
 obedience. ThisI take to be little lefs than a dcmon(\ration, that this precept of St. ?aul 
 cannot be undcrftood only ot fubjeclion to powers that had a legal Right. 
 
 Befidesthis, the rcafon the Apoftle gives tor fubmiflionto the higher powers is not a 
 legal Right, but the Authority of God; that all power for every one, wiio exercifeth 
 the fupreme power^ it of God, ^nA the Ordinance of God, which feems plainly inrended 
 to wave the difputc about the legality of the powers, whiek was the Objection of the 
 Vharifeet, agalnft fubmiflion to the Rew/rw power j and an Objcdion which no body 
 made but them fclves: they thouoht they were not bound by God tofubmit to the Rtf- 
 »w«powers; nay, that they were bound by the Law of God not to fabnit to them, as 
 being unjufl Ufurpations upon the priviledges and liberties of God's people, and there- 
 fore the ^poflle tells them, that all Power is of God ; and the powers that be, are ordained 
 of God, wherein certainly he neverintendcd tojuftifieall theRo>w<t»Ufurpations, orto 
 vindicate the legality of their power, which will as reafonablyjuftifie all the Revolutions 
 that ever were in the world i but toafTertthe providence of God, and his fupreme au« 
 thonty* in lunsfcwijjg Kingdoms and JSmpites , in removing Kings, aad (crtingup 
 
 • F ' ' ' Kings»
 
 1 4 ^he Cafe of the i^Hegiance 
 
 Kings. AnAwhenthc^^/>o/?/e fays. Ml power is of God, tKere is no reafoti *fo conffne 
 this to all legal potvers, unirf^ ir were evidently the Doftrine of Scripture , that ufnrped 
 powers are n^t of G^d, which is To far from being true, that the contrary is cvi lent ; 
 that the moft high ruUth in the kittgdo»i of men, and giveth it to tphomfoever he will, 
 JOany^. y-j. which is fpokc with retcrence KoxVt fo\AfUonafthiei, which were all as ma 
 niteil Ururpations.as ever were in the tvorld, anJ yet fee op by the decree and counfel of 
 God, andtorc-toldbya prophetick Spirit : and whoever will confine the power and 
 authority of God, in changing Times and Seafons, in removing Kings andfetting up Kings, 
 to Humane Laws, ought not tobcdifputed with. 
 
 lotbisladd, that this didinclion, that only Legal, not Ufurped Powers, areof 
 God, bad made the ^^o/?/ej direction fignific nothing, for the great Queftion had been 
 ftill undetermined, what Powers are of God, and what Powers they muft obey, if fomc 
 Powers be ol God, and fomc not. When he fays, the Powers that bes had he confined 
 thisto the then pre fent Powers, it would have dircfted them at that time, but had been 
 no general dircftion to Chriftians in other Ages, to obey the prrfent Powers, and then 
 we have no direftion in Scripture, what todoinfuchdifputed Cafes, unlefsby a parity 
 o\ Reafon $ and if we muft obey (uch powers, as the Koman Power was, 1 know very 
 few powers that we may not obey ; for whatever Legal Right the Roman £mperois had, 
 who by fear, or flattery, or other any, extorted fome kind of confent from the 5e»tf/r, 
 it is plain, the Row<<«; themfelvcs were great Ufurpers, and had no other Right to the 
 greateft part of their £mpirc, butConqu'cftandUfurpation. 
 
 This i'm fuie, the only diredion of Scripture is to fubmit to thofe who are in Autho- 
 rity, who are in thcadual admiaiftration of Government, to reverence and obey them, 
 to pray for them, to pay Tribute to them, 4i God's Minifiersy attending continually upon, 
 this very thing, and not to rcfiit them ', but there is not the leaft notice given us of any 
 kind of Du<yowingortobe paid to a Prince out of Authority, and removed from the 
 admifiiftrarsonof Government, whatever his Right may be: We have no Example in 
 Scripturej thatanypeope were ever beamed for fubmitting to the prefent powers, what- 
 ever the nfurpation were, though we have -Examples of their being condemned for re- 
 fufing to fubmit to them j wUnefs the Prophefies of 'Jeremiah, and the Difcourfesof 
 ©ur Sgviour with the Scrihet and f hart fees about paying Tribute to Ctefar. 
 
 Our5avlour*s Argument relies wholly on the po&flion of power, whoje Image ani 
 Super fcriptioH hath it ? And if this be a good Reafon, it is good in all other cafes j that wc 
 muft fubmit to all Princes, who arc pofrefTcdrfthe Sovereign power, and are in the 
 full admiaiftration of Government: The Prophet Jfyciii/4i5>'s Argument is Prophecy, or 
 an exprefs Command from God to fubmit/to the King of Babjlon-, and there was great 
 reaion for an cxprcfs Command from Goyd'at that time, becaufeGod himfcif had entail, 
 ed the Kingdom upon David's Pofterity, and ;terefore without an exprefs Command 
 from God, they could not fubjcft themfdves t^ any other Prince, while any of that Fa- 
 mily were living, which is the reafon t^iffehoiada theHtgh.Pricft gives for depofing 
 •^thaliah, who had (Jfurped the Throne for fix years, and 'anointing Joa/l the King's 
 Son, behold the King's Son /hall Reign, m the Lord hath faid oj the Sens ofDdvidi But 
 where God has made no entail of the Crown, but the entail is only by Humane Laws, 
 there is no need of Prophecy to dirccl people to fubmit to any new Prince, whom God 
 fct^ aver them. 
 
 f or we muft dbferve, that this was at the beginning of thtfiur M^narchiei, whicfc 
 
 God inrendcth fucceffively to ereft, to whom he gave the Kingdoms of the World, not 
 
 excepting his own People I/we/; and in that Command be gave to them to fubmit 
 
 soibofcPoww, twhkbwa$rcn€W€dbyChriaaiidlwApoftlcO bas wo^uU Chri- 
 
 - itiaB» :
 
 due to Sovereign Towers, &c, \ ^ 
 
 ftlanstodofo too, and not to oppofe any Humane Right or Intereft againft thcBlvinc 
 vill and pleaTurc, whcnir is fufficicntly declared bv the rvcntsot Providence. And the 
 hr( pbccy t>f 'he/oKrMowayc/j/ejis nor vttatanend 5 for under the fourth Monarchy the 
 Kinsjd< m 1. 1 C/jrif/ wasto befct up, and ^wf/c/?)/^ was to appear, andthc iticreafe and 
 dcftrudiunottht Kingdom of ^w//ffcr7/? is robe accomplifVied by great Chargts and 
 K< volu 'onsin Humane Governments ; and when God ha^dedared, that he will change 
 Time? and Seafons, remove Kings, and feiup Kings, to acconr.plifh hisown wife 
 Counfe s, it judifies oUr neci (Tary, and thcref^ re innoctnt compliance with fuch Revo- 
 lutions, as much as if wc were cxprefly commanded to do fo, asthe Je^.^x ^erc by the 
 Vrol>het ]ereM ah. This a man may fay without Enthefiafm, or pretending tounder- 
 flandall the Prcphefie^ofthe Kei;e/rf<iowy, and to apply them to their particular events, 
 for without that we certainly know, that all the great Revolutions ot the World are in- 
 tended by God to ferve thofe great ends -, and when God will overturn Kingdoms and 
 Empires, remcvc and fet up Kings ashe fees will beftfervethe accomplifliment ofhis 
 own Gounfels and Decrees, it is very hard,i^ Subjcfts muft not quietly fubmit to fuch 
 Revolutions: Wc muft not contrary m our fworn Duty and Allegiance promote fuch 
 Kevo!utions, upon a pretence cffulfillingPr phcfies, but when they are made and fet- 
 kd, wc ought to fubmit to them. 
 
 Now when wc have no diredVion iti Scripture at all about making or unmaking ^ings, 
 orrcftoringa difpofleffcdPrincc to his ^rone again, and all the Commands we have 
 in 5criprure about Obedience and SuFjedionto Government, manifcftly rcfpeftthe 
 prcfent Ruling Powers, without any diftmftion between Rightful or Ufurped powers, 
 it fcemsp'ainly to determine this Queftionon the fide of the prcfent Powers j at leaft 
 it leaves us to the guidance andconduft of Reafon in this matter, and therefore let us im- 
 partially confidcr what Reafon (ays. 
 
 2, lobfcrvc then in the next place, tbatthisgives thecaficft and moft iniclUgible ac- 
 count of the Original of Human Government ^ that all power is from God, who is the 
 Sovereign Lord ohhe World, 
 
 This has been a very pcrplextand intricate Difputebothin Religion and Politicks^' 
 md men have zcaloufly efpoufed different H^/ro/Af/r;, as they have had different ends 
 to ferve. 
 
 The matter of Faft, how Monarchies firft began, and what was the Original of parti- 
 cular Monarchies, isvery obfcure for wantof Hif^ory, which is the only way to know 
 it : Some think, all power was origiaalfy derived from Choice and Confent of the 
 People: Others afcribc it to the Right of Conqueft, which they think without more 
 ado confers a Right of Government i others ihnk Conqueft gives no Right* but the 
 Submiflion of the conquered peop'e, or the long continuance of fuch an Ufurpation does; 
 cfpecially when fuch a Government defcends from Fsthcrto Sort, and is become an In- 
 heritance, either by Prefcription, or Laws; which fome men think then fo Sacred, 
 that they muft in no cafe fubmit to any other Government, while any Legal Heir to the 
 Crown is living, and makes his Claim. 
 
 Nowl think there is no doubt, butfeveral Governments have been begun allthefe 
 waysj bntftill it is God, whoby his Providence advances men to the Throne, and in- 
 Vefts them with his Authority by aJhhefe ways; for the Authority is Gods, and itishi* 
 advancing them to the Throne which gives them this Authority. 
 
 It fa evident, there is no Natural Authority, but the Vattrnul and Vatftarth'tCMl Au- 
 thority j and that Monarchies were erefted upon theruincsor great diminution ofit^ 
 und whether thi» were by con&nt/ or (asis moft probable) byviolcm Ufurpations,. 
 
 9i
 
 1 6 The Ca/e of the Allegiance 
 
 of which Nimrod Cctms to have fet the fir ft E xample, it was equally unjuft ; for no Au- 
 thority isfo Sacred, as what is Natural, which no man had .Authority to give away, ox 
 toUfurp: But by this means God crcdcd Monarchies, and gave bis Authority to Men 
 who had no Authority of their own. 
 
 If the Choice and Confenr of the people makes a Prince, then no man is a Subjcft, but 
 be who confcnts to be (o j for the Major Vote cannot include my confent.unlefsi pleafej 
 tharisthceffeftofLaw, and Gompaft or Force, not of Nature. IfSubjcfts givetheir 
 Prince Authority, they may take it away again, if they pleafc j there can be no irrcfiftiblc 
 Authority derived from the People,- for if the Authority be wholly derived from them, 
 who fhall hinder them from taking it away, when they fee fir ? Upon thefe Principle?, 
 there can be no Hereditary Monarchy; one Generation can onlychoofe for themfelvcs, 
 their Pofterity having as much Right to choofe as they had ; 
 
 IfConqucftgivcsa Right, then Force, themoft unjuft and violent Force, is Right j 
 and then every man by the fame Rule, whoisftrongerthanlam, has a Natural Right 
 to Govern me. 
 
 Submiflionisonly a forced and after-confent not tomakeaKing, buttoown him, 
 - who hasmadchimfelf King, and whom very often we would dKown and rcjcd, were 
 it fafe to do fo; and what Right can that give more than Force? 
 
 The continuance of an Ufurpation can never give a Right, unlcfs that which is wrong 
 ^an grow right by continuance: An Ufurper bylong continuance may outJivc thofe, 
 who formerly wore the Crown ; but does it give Right to him, who has none, that he 
 out lives thofe, who hadthe Right? Forthoughno Body elfe had any Right tothc 
 Crown, how does this make him a Rightful King, who has no R ight ? 
 
 An Herec/jV^tr-yR/^^/ is either a continued Ufurpation, which can give no Right, or 
 a Right by Law'i thatis, by the confenr of the Pfcple to entail the Crown on fuch a Fa- 
 mily, which, as I obferved before, It Right be rcfolvtd into he Choice and Confcnt of 
 the People, cannot be done j for what Right had my Anccftors three or four hundred 
 years ago, tochoofeaKing for me - 
 
 So that I cannot fee where to (ix the Foundation of Government, bnt in the provi- 
 dence of God, who either bv the choice^oftht major or ftronger part of the people, or 
 byConquef^, or by Submiflion, and the long fucceflive continuance of power, or by 
 liutTian I aws, gives a Prince and his F.innlypoflc{Iion of the Throne, which isa good 
 Title againft all Humane Claims, and requires the Obedience andSubmiflion ofSub- 
 jeAsaslongasGodispleafed to continue him and his Family in the Throne j but it is 
 no Title agvnft God, if he picafe to advance another Prince. 
 
 TofavthatGodfctsupno I'rince, who afcends the Throne without a Human and 
 l.cgal Right, is to fay, that fome Kings arc rcmoved,|and others fct up, but not by God; 
 which is a dirtd comradiftion to Scripture i it is to fay, that the Four Monarchies were 
 not fet up bv God, bccaufe they all began by Violence and Ufurpation .• It is to fay. That 
 God, as well as men, is confined by Humane Laws, in making Kings; Jtistofay, 
 that the Right of Government is not derived from God, without the confcnt of the 
 People; for ifGodca^i't make a King without the People, or againft their confentde- 
 dared by (heir Laws, the Authority muft be derived from the People, not from God; 
 or at leaft if it be God's Authority, yet God can*t give it himfclf without the People, nor 
 Othcrwife than as they have dirtied him by their Laws. 
 
 This is all very abfurd, and what thofe pcrfons abhor the thoughts of, who infiftfo 
 much upon a Legal Right, that they will own no King, who alcends the Throne, with- 
 out it^ nor believe that God places him there wirhouc and againft a Legal Right: but 
 
 if
 
 duetoSovereignVowers, &c. i^ 
 
 ifthcv would examine themfclvet for what Rcafon they believe that a King who has no 
 Right to the Throne, is not fet up by God, andinvcfted with his Authority, they will 
 find. That it muft ultimately rcfolvc it fclf into the Authority of the People to make 
 Kings, which it is unjuft for God himielf to over, rule and alter i for a legal Entail is no* 
 thing more than the Authority of the People j and if the People have fuch an uncon* 
 trouiable Authority in making Kings, I doubt they will ehallenge as much Authority 
 to unmake them too. Itthefolc Authority of Government be from God, and 
 God gives this Authority only by placing a Prince in the Throne, then by whatcvec 
 means he docs it, it is the fame thing. When fuch a Prince is fetled in the Throne, be 
 is God's King and Minifter, and muft be Reverenced and Obeyeil by the People who 
 live under hisGovernmmt ^ thusit muft be, if all Power he of God 
 
 But there arc fcveral Objcftions againft this, which muft be briefly anfwered. 
 I. It is objedcd. That this makes a Prince lofe his Right by being notorioufly infurcd ; Oij'eS 
 for il a profpcrous Ufurper gets into ibeThiOnc, and fettles himfcU there, God has 
 taken away his Crown, and given it co another j and therefore he ought not to attempt 
 the recovery of his Throne (nor any other Prince to affift him in it) which is to oppofc 
 C^k], and to challenge that which he has no longer any Right to . 
 
 1 anfwer. By no means : The Providence of God removes Kings, and fet$ up Kings, ^ r 
 but alters no Legal Rights, nor forbids thofe who are difpoirefTed of them, to recover '""*" 
 their Right, when they can. While fueh a Prince is in the Throne, it is a declaration oC 
 God*sWill, that he fhall Reign for fomc time, longer orfhorter, as God pieafcs^ and 
 that is an obligation to 5ubje^s to fubmit and obey; for fubmiftion is owing only to 
 Ood*s Authority ; but that one Prince is at prefent placed in the Throne, and the other 
 removed out of it, docs not prove, that it isGod*$ Will it fhould always be fo, and there- 
 fore docs not diveft the difpofTcft Prince of his Legal Right and Claimj nor forbid biiu 
 CO endeavour to recover his Throne, nor forbid thofe who are under no obligation to Ac 
 Prince in poffcflion, to affift the difpoflefled Prince to recover his Legal Right ; A Le«al 
 and Succefllve Right is the ordinary way whereby the Providence of God advances Princei 
 to any Hereditary Throne : And this bars all other humane Claims ; but yet God may 
 ■|ve the Throne to another, if hepleafesi and this docs not deftroy the legal Right of 
 tte difpcflcflcd Prince, nor hinder him from claiming it, when he finds his opportunity. 
 But it may perhaps be farther faid. If the dipofteffed Prince may ftillhave the legal 
 Rigjit and Claim to the Crown, and he who is pofTcfTcd of the Crown, may have none. 
 It it not very unjuft in Subjefts to pay Allegiance to him who is poflTcdcd of^thc Throne 
 Without Right, and to withdraw their Allegiancefromhimwho has the Right/ Is not 
 ibis to juftific and fupportlnjuftice and Violence, and to opprefs opprcflcd Innocence 
 md Ri^t •• And can the Providence of God make that our Duty, which is fo manifeft. 
 Sj unjait and wicked } 
 
 1 anfwer } To deny any man, much more a Prince, what is his juft Right, andwhidi 
 I am bound to give him, if certainly very unjuft, and that which the Providence of God 
 an never juftifie ; but then we muft confider. What the Prince's Right is ; and. What 
 is the Duty of Subjefts j and. When Subjcfts may be faid to deny their Prince's Right. 
 
 TheRightof the Prince is to adminifter the Government of the Nation; the Duty of 
 S«b)eas is to fubmit to his Government, and obey his Laws, when he does aftually ad- 
 Winiftcr the Government i and thofe who do not refufe to obey him when he governf, 
 deny him no Right that ihcy owe him j for there »$ no Duty 5ubjcfts owe to Princes, as 
 Subieas, but to obey them i Mdioiiovbcyj when ihcy don't and can'i Govern, I? 
 todcnycioKig^t.
 
 if theCaJe ofKjillegiance 
 
 T«, you*! fay. The pofleflion of the Crown, anc}tbea£lual Admlnlftratiofl of Go« 
 vcrnment, is his Blight i aivi i^ wc own any other Governing Power, wc deny hitn 
 rhat Right, ' ' , 
 
 ianfwcr, ^uppofe he have a Legal Right to Govern, but can*t^ Obedience l« not 
 his night ; and thertforc lo pay my Obedience to thofc who do Govern , is no denial of 
 his Legal Right } but a dtte Submiflion to the Providence of God, who hatha Right 
 fuperiour to all Humane Rights, in the difpofal of Crowns and Kingdoms. 
 
 The Duty of Siibjcfts as Aich, is ro obey their Prince, and fubaiic to him whilfthc 
 governs, and is in poilcflion of the Throne: But tiien Kings muft take fonnc care alfo 
 to prefcrvc their Crowns by good Government \ and it they will run the hazard of their 
 Crowns, thofeofthcir Subjcds are certainly not to be blamed by fuchs Prince, wbodid 
 nothing to take his Crown from him. 
 
 But fomeit m;iy be will fay. That fueh Subjefts are bound <vea in fucha cafe to 
 maintain and defend their King in his hrone. 
 
 I am not fo veryfurc of that; but this I am (lire of. That whenever People havct 
 
 food King, it is both their Duty andlntereft to defend him; and if they be nor milled 
 y the Cunning and Artifice of ill men , they will ccruinly do fo. But if they have a 
 Very bad one, thatnotorioufly violates their Rights, and breaks the Conftitutiun upon 
 which himfe'fftands, and fti ikes at the dearefl things they have, their Religion cftabHlh- 
 cdby Law, and their Properties, I doubt the cafe may be altered j and though every 
 body will notfpeak it out, yet moil may fay in their hearts. Let him go, if he cannot 
 defend himfelf. It is enough in conCcience patiently to bear fo bad a Prince, but a little 
 too m'lch to venture their Lives and Fortunes to keep him in the Throne to opprcfs them; 
 this is agaitift Reafon and Nature, anii I know no Law of God which requires it : A Sub* 
 iecl, andaSouldier , toObey a Prince* and to Fight for him. arc two things; and to 
 beaSubiedofanyPrince, does not cither by the Laws of God or Man» necedarilf 
 makehitiia Souldier. 
 
 Bat have we not fworn to the King, his Hcifs and Lawful Succeflbrt, to defend and 
 snaimain his Perfon, Crown, and Dignity! And are wc not bound by this Oath ^ 
 
 J anfwer, i I grant i t is fo ; but theti wc nn.ud diftinguifh two parts in this Oath i 
 1. The Natural Duty of Subjt^^s, which is Faith and true Allegiance, or Obedience and 
 SubmifTion to the Government of the King. a. That Duty and Obligation which if 
 fuperinduced by Law, to'maintain and de^ad the King's Right to the Crown, and alt 
 the Dignities and Prerogatives of it« which is novcnadc a |»art, not of our MatiiraU 
 but Legal Allegiance. 
 
 The reafon ofthe thing te>ls us,That this is itot an Arbitrary , but real Diftiflftlpn ; and 
 then, tho*our Natural and Legal Allegiance be both included in the ^me Oath, chef 
 arc of a didind Confldcration. 
 
 Natural Allegiance, or Obedience and Subfc£lion to Gof ernment, ts doc to the King, 
 confidered in the adua' Adminiftration of Government, and nootherwtfc, becaufeic 
 can be paid only to the Regnant Prince ; and it is dsue to all Kings, who arc fctlcd id the 
 Government ? for it is due to Govcrnmcnt,and for that reafon,to the Prince who governs^ 
 Legal Allegiance, or Maintenance and Defence, is due only hy Law, and therefore 
 can oblige no farther thati Humane Laws do, which muft always give way to the Lawi 
 of God; and therefore Natural Allegiance (in cafe of a Competition) vacates the Ob. 
 ligation of Legal Allegiance and Oaths ^ as the Laws of God and Mature muft take 
 place of all humane pofitivc Laws and Oaths. If then I have fworn to maintain and 
 defend mjf King, who bai a Legal .Ki^t to tbc Throne* whatever iimcam bythi»
 
 Due to^overeignTowers, Sec, 
 
 Maintf nancf and DcfcRcc, i1 he happen to be difpcfTciTed of his Throne, and another 
 Prince placed there, whom, in Reverence to the Authority of God, 1 am to obey, and 
 fubmitto, without Rtfiftancej lam abfolvcd from my Legal Allegiance to maintain 
 and defend my cjcftcd Prince, becaufc 1 cannot do it without violating that Allegiance, 
 vhichby he Lawsot God i owe to the Regnant Prince i for 1 cannot defend the di(- 
 poiTeffcd Prince, whom I have fworn to defend, without oppofing and rcfifting the 
 Regnant Prince, whom by the Laws of God 1 am bound to obey. 
 
 2. This Legal Allegiance, orMaimenance and Vejence, is Sworn only to a King in 
 PoflffTion, andfign ficsnomore, than to maintain and defend him in the PofTcfTionof 
 the Throne, as hAving a Legal Right to it : Wc can legally take this Oath only to a King, 
 wboisinP^^flclTion, for it muft be aw^miniftied by his Authority 5 andihc Obligationof 
 Oaths muft nor be cx-endcd beyond the neccffary Signification of Words i now to main- 
 tain and defen -i the King's Perfon, Crown , and Dignity , and to rcftore him to his Throne 
 whcnheis difp fllfTed, are two very different things; and therefore he, who Swears 
 to maintain and defend, is not by venue of that Oath oWdged to ref^orcj while a 
 Prince ison the Throne. Suljfftsaie in acapacity to defend and prefervc him there ; ani 
 therefore may oblidgc thcmfelvc? to ir, and there maybe Reafons why this ftiouMbt 
 exa^cd from iheno , but in ordinary Cafes, if they cannot defend the KinginpoHeflion, 
 there is little likelihood tbey fhouldbe able to reflorchimj and therefore no reafon« 
 that Subjefts fliould bind themfelvesby fuch an Oath. 
 
 To venture our Lives and Fortunes to prcferve the Kings Perfon and Government, 
 while he is in Poflcfnon, is reafonabic encugh ; becaufe it is a real Service to our King ani 
 Country, to prevent uninftUfurpations, which overturn the Government, and often 
 anfettle or dcftrov the Laws, and with them the Rights and Liberties of Subjcfts, as well 
 astheXightoftheKing; butto5wcar todoouroutmoft toreftore theKing, when be 
 isdifpofl.ficd.istoSwearnevertofubmittoufurpedPowers, but to take all Opportuni- 
 ties to overthrow fuch Governments to reftore our King, which is contrary to our Duty» 
 when God removes one King, and feti up another; which expofes our Lives and For- 
 tunstoruin, when we cannot ferve our King by it $ which provokes fuch new Powers, 
 if they be not more mercifu', to fecure t hemfelves by rooting out fuch fworn Enemies to 
 cheir Government s and then the Confecfuenee of this Oath, is. That if our King be 
 driven outofthe Land, we will follow him into Banifhment, or venture being hanged 
 •tbome; that we will dif^urb all G wcmments, and raife Rebellions, and Civil Wars,. 
 ifwecan. toreftore our King tho* with the utter Ruin and Deftruftion of the Nation. 
 I believe fhould all this be exprefled in an Oath, there is no man in his wits would take it» 
 for the fake of the beft Prince that ever fway'd a Scepter ; and how unrcafonable then if 
 4t,to expound an Oath to fuch a Senfcasno Man would have taken it in, had it been e«- 
 preflcd? However, it appears, that there is fuch a va ft difference between iMimr««/«^ 
 #«<lrfe/e»<I/Kj^ a Regnant Prince, and refioring a difpoflTcfTcd Prince, that to reftore is 
 Hot ncccffarilv indu^^ed iamiUHtaittmg. 
 
 Buc we Swear not only to the King, but to his Hcire, and Lawful SHCceflTors, who 
 •rcnotin Aftuil PofTeflion; and therefore that muft fignifie togivc them Pofleftion 1 
 Right * if the King die poffeft of the Crown, we Swear-to maintain the Succeftion, and 
 to own the true Heir for our King ; but if the King be driven out of Pofleflion, and his 
 Hetrt with him, and another Prince poflcfled of the Throne, this Oath can no more 
 oblidgc us to (et the Baaiftied Heir upon the Throne^than to rcftore the Banirhcd King. 
 
 But by (wearing to the Heirs, and Legal or Lawjul 5u(cejp>rs,wc Swear not to own Of 
 ftfb^t toatif fiinct, who is Dot tU L^l He'ur. That i ^eny ; wc Swear , if you plcafe, 
 
 aoJt
 
 %Q T*^ Ca/i of the Allegiance 
 
 not to make it our Aft, not to fct op any Prince, who is not the right Heifj and irc 
 Swcartooirn the right Heir, it hcgets Poffcffionj but wc do not Swear nottofub- 
 niit to any Prince, who gets into Poffcin on, and is fettled in the Throne without a Legal 
 Right i the words fignific no fuch thing, no more than Maintaining and Defending, 
 fignifics Reftoring, 
 
 }. I obfcrve farther. That th!§ Maintenance and Defence, which wc Swear, ofthc 
 Ring's Perfon and Crown, is only a Legal Maintenmcc and Defence j for the Law will 
 oocjuftifie, much lefs does it command any illegal Defence } and therefore a Legal 
 Oath can oblidgc us only to a Legal Defence. 
 
 This is true, with reference to the C««/*e j for we arc not bound to defend the King 
 againftLaw, or when he Subverts the Laws, and Liberties, and the Le.:al EftablifVied 
 Religion of the Kingdom, by Illegal Methods. A Sovereign Prince rauft not be reCfted 
 by force, nor muft he be affiited and defended againft Law i for tho* the King be unac- 
 countable, ycthisMiniftasandlnftrumemsarenotj ani no man is bound to ferveoc 
 defend the King in that, for which by the Law of the Land he may be hanged for a 
 Tray tor j and this in a limited Monarchy, fets Bounds to Sovereign Power; forunlefs 
 Sublets will betray their own Liberties, and venture to be hanged for it, fuch a Prince 
 cannot hurt them i and chelate Revolution teaches us, ( and all Princes ought to take 
 warning by. it .) how eafily a Prince is ruined, when he has forfeited the AfFeftions, and 
 the Legal Defence of his iubjefts, by the £xercifc of an Illegal and Arbitrary powers 
 and if the Oath of Allegiance does not oblidge Subjefts to defend a Prince in the £xercifc 
 ©fan Arbitrary power ,• 1 think, it much lefsoblidges them to rcftorc fucb a ^rinccj and 
 ilrbitrary power with him. 
 
 But that which I mean by a Legal Defence, f let the Caufe be what it will) isfuch 
 a Defence, asiheLawiequiresall Subjefts to give their King; for a Legal Oath caa 
 fcquire no other Defence than the Law requires. 
 
 Now the only Legal Defence, wherein all 5ubjcfts are concern'd, is either the Mi/iiid, 
 or the Voi^t Co»i//4liM,which are in the power of the ilcgnant Pi incc^and cannot defend a 
 f rifice who is out of Poflcflfion ; and therefore, if t his Oath me«n9 only a Legal Defence, 
 it muft he confined to the King while he is in Poflfeflion, and has the power of the King- 
 dom in hishands.j for I cannot defend a DifpofTcflcd Prince by fervingin the Militia, of 
 Woffe Comitatus, which is al wayes in the power of the Regnant Prince. 
 
 Buta Princemay raiCe an ^rmjr for his Defence, befidesthe Militidof the Countrfi 
 and this he may do, when he is out of Po0efnon, and Loyal SubjcAs ought chcarfiilif 
 Co fcrye him in it. 
 
 Kow htre is a great queftion, which I am not Lawyer enough to decide i Whether a 
 Commiflion granted b) a King out of Pofleilion. be a Legal Commiflioni but be that 
 iiow it will, i am fure, there is no Law that requires all Subjects to receive Commif- 
 lionsfrom the King, tho*he beinpofiHIionofthe Government, nor to lift themfeivei 
 ^Souldiersinhis Army) and therefore this is no part of that Lrgal^ Defence^which w< 
 Swear. All that Legal Defence which we fwear to the King, can be paid only to the Kins 
 in Poflcffion, and what we have not Sworn, wc are not bound to by the Oath of 
 Allegiance* which is the only thing wc are now enquiring after. This the whole Ha» 
 tion, both pcince and people have, fufiiciently acknowledccd, by making and receif- 
 ingAddrefTesof hives dnd fortunes, whichisfkppofedio iignifiefomc otfier Defence 
 chan the Oath of Allegiance oblidgcd them to } and therefore, were not of the mind of 
 Chofe Men, who think their Sworn Allegiance binds them to rcftore the Kii)g< when Di(- 
 fpodcllbd ot bif Thioae» at the eipcacc «f tbdr iivci and fiotiuaxu
 
 duetoSovereig7iVowers, &c. %t 
 
 4. It is worth confidcring alio. That the Oarhof Allegiance is a National Oath, and 
 therefore the c^efencc or mainterance we fwtar, is National, that is, to join with our 
 Fellow. fubjcds in dciendingihcKirgs pcifcn and Crcwn : For (irg'e ^ubjcds caianot 
 dothisby thcrTiiVlves, and "the way to cbl.g<; them all, istoimpofe a National Oath to 
 be taken b) all Subjcd?. 
 
 Now fuch Oaths oblige every particulare Man to do no injury to the Kings Pcrfcn or 
 Crown, nottoeDterintoPlotsandConfpiradesagainft him , and as for adual dcftncc, 
 chearlullyto venruiehis Life and Fommes with his Fellow- .Subjt^s to prefcivc the King. 
 Buc in cafe the great Body of the Nation abfolve thenr.klvcs from thtfe Oaths, andde- 
 pofe their King, anddriv<:him cut of his Kingdom, and fet up another Prince in his 
 room, it is worth con(id^r;ng, Whether feme private men, it may be but a little hand- 
 ful, are ftill bound by their Oath, to make fume weak and dangerous attempts, and to 
 fight for their King againft their Countrcy, certainly this was not the intention of the 
 Oath, for it isaNatioi^al, not a private Defence, we fwear ; and therefore a general 
 revolt of a Nation, thoughitfhould be wicked and unjuftifiable, yerirfeemsto excufc 
 thofe, who had neither band nor he?rt in it, Uom their fworn defence of the King's 
 Pcrfon, and Crown, 2nd to make tiieir complianc*! with the National Govermrenr in- 
 nocent and neccilary. For an Oath to fight for the King, does not obli le us to fi^ht a- 
 gainfVourCountrv, which is as unnatural , as to fighr againf\ our Kii^g. 1 he (urn is 
 thisi God, when he fees fir, can remove Kings, or fct up Kings, with^ ur any regard to 
 humane Right, as being the Sovereign Lord of the World, who rules in the Kingdcms 
 o\ Men, andgiveth thf m to whomfoevcr he will: but Subjccls in fetting up, or re- 
 moving Kings, miufl have regard to Legal Right; andifthey ^u'l down a rightful King, 
 and fet^'up a Kin2 without Kiohr, (un'ds the Conflitutionof the Government infome 
 Cafes fbould allow it) srcatly fin in it, efpecially when they have fwoin the de'enccci 
 the Legal Right, and Legal Succedion : butthe Duty and AlKg'anceof Sulj dsdoes 
 not immediatly refpcft Right, butthe aftual adminiftration oT Goveinment; when 
 there is a fettled Government in a Nation : for that is God's Authority, which mufl be 
 obeyed : no mian wufl fwear away this, no more than any other part of his Duty ; and 
 no man doth fwear away this by the Oath of Allegiance, as I have already fhewn. 
 
 But ii will be farther objrfted, That if this Dcdrine do not take awsy the Legal ^^-^^^ 
 Right, yet it makes it impoffible for fuch an injur'd Prince to recover hi- Right, when all 
 hi«Subje£ls have fworn Allegiance to a new Prince, and therefore can no longer aflift 
 him. 
 
 lanfwer; This may be called ad fficulty In Providence, if you pVafe, but it '^"0 ^^r^.^^ 
 • difficulty to the Subjeft, if he purfue his Duty in it, unlefsa paftionateafFcaicnfor the ^ 
 -dilpodeffed Trince make it a difficulty f but fuch a misfortune as this, can rarely happen 
 to a bebvcd Prince ; and when SubjeiVs are overpowered by force, and can neither de- 
 fend themfelves, nor their Prince, there is no remedy left but to yield to neccflity, and 
 leave every thing elfe to the Divine Providence. 
 
 The Divine Providence has ways and methods of removing , Kings, and fcrting up 
 Kings, which we are notawaicof, norccnctrncd toknr w, becaufcitisnopart of ouc 
 duty: No man could have forcfeen, how C^ H. fhould hrve returned, who had a 
 powerful Army againft him ; or Jtf. IT. be driven cut of hisKihgdc.m, attheHeadofa 
 powerful Army, without fhedding of blood. All ihc Plots and Con''p:raciesof the 
 Loyal party were vain, and had no other cfFcft, but to bring foroe worthy and gallant 
 Men to an unhappy end j but what they could not do, Cod did without tbcmj and all 
 (ttcb Cafes we mu^ leave to God .
 
 The Cafe of {Allegiance , 
 
 Butdoes not thisencouragedaringand ambitious. Spirltstognrp at Crowns and in- 
 vade their Naghbours, when they know that Succefsglves them Sovereign Authority, 
 and obliges Subjeds, not withftanding all former Oaths/' to pay all Duty and AUcoiance 
 
 . Ambitious and daring Spirits need no other encouragement but Power toorafp at 
 Crowns; and if they havctbis, they value no move: promife them but ^uccefs . and 
 they will try, whether Subjeds will obey or not. I dare fay, fuch rmen never took it in. 
 to confidcration, whetherSubjeds would think themfdvcs bound in Confciencetoobey 
 them, m cafe they prevailed i they feldom trouble themfeives about Confcience, but 
 truft to other Arguments to fccure their Thrones, when they have once <^otten them. 
 And ifthey take this Dodrine all together, as they muft do, if they entourage their 
 i^mbirion, by Reafon and Principles, itwillgiveno encouragement to Ambitious Spi- 
 rits wjtnout a great dofe of Entliufufm: Forif the Kingdoms of the World be difpofed 
 by G Jd , and no Art or Power can place any Prince on the Thronc,but by God's appoin^. 
 mcnr,urjcs they can flatter themfelves, that God hasordain'dthcmtobe KinPs, it will 
 check ail their ambitious Attempts, whichG )d can fo eafily defeat. 
 
 ButifthisDodrine fhould prove inconvenient to Princes, and dangerous totheic 
 Thronesj I am furetfie contrary Dodrine is much m^re dangerous toSubirds, when 
 anyfuch2ievoIut!onhippens5 foritfacrif^ccs them to the rage and fury of Conquering 
 and Reigning Princes, when they are obliged by Principles of Gonfcience tooppofeand 
 dilown their Government, which icis folly to think any Prince will cndurej and thouoh 
 IhaveasgreatareverencefcrPrincesasanyman. Ido not think che Rightand Intercf^ 
 of any i ruicc fo confiderable, as the Safety and Prcfervationof a Nation, and the Lives 
 and Fortunes of all his Subjeds. 
 
 In a word. The Objedorsdo not thinklt a fufKcient Confutation of the Dodrine of 
 Non-r.Mance. and Pafllve Obedience, to fay. That this puts it into the King's power, 
 to invade the Laws and Liberties, the Lives and Fortunes, of hisoubkdsat plcafurej 
 and y<^^ there !S moredanger of this from an Ambitiousand Arbitrary Prince, than there 
 IS, that the Dcdlrine of Obedience and SubmifTion to the GoveminF Powers, fhould 
 encourage Amb.tionsSptiits to invade their Neighbours Thrones ; ""the Divine Provi. 
 dencc takes care of all fuch extraordinary Cafes, and there we mufl leave them. 
 
 Buthave not Pyrates and Robbers as good a Titleto my Purfe, asanUfurperhas to 
 the Crown, wbichhefcizesby as manifeft force and violence-^ Does not the Providence 
 ot God order and difpofe all thefe events \ And are we not bound then asmuchtofub- 
 mit to Pyrars, as to Ofurpers ? 
 
 The difpute is not about humane and legal Right in either Cafe, butabout Authoritv, 
 which IS tne only reafon of a confvientious fubjedion,- now no Man pretends, that 
 Thieves and Pyrates have God's Authority, to which we mufl fubmit ; but the Scripture 
 exprefly tells us, That Kingdoms are difpofed by God j Thatall Poweris of God/and 
 there.ore when any Prirce, by what un^ufl means foever, with refped to Men, .s placed 
 in thelhrone. and feiled there. He is advanced by God. is God's Ordinance, God's 
 Minitter, and mafl be obeyed for Gonfcience f.kc : And therefore the outrages of Thieves 
 and Pyrats arc very impertinently alledged in this Caufe. They have force and violence, 
 which every Man muft fubmit to, when he cannot help it j but Sovereign Power is 
 Gods Authority, though Princes may be advanced to it by no honefter means, than 
 Ihieves rake a Purfe, or break open my Houfe, and take my Money, or Goods. The 
 beginnings of thf four Monarchies were no better, and yet their Power was God's. 
 
 iiut did not Jehojadtt the High-prieft anoint Jaajb the King's Son, and dcpofc and ki'l
 
 oHhe SuHrftf squired the Allegiance and fidelity and Obedience '- - 
 
 fulHe^4'!'c1aimm?^rf7'K''T:'""''''l" •''■■'' Thatwhen.he Lesal and Right. M". 
 u "^'."-f "•^") P""'f'^'J of his Throne, Sub .fts may return to their Allesiance and 
 
 Procbit^^e'^leLr". t" "a" ■"Z^?'"" "^ "'"^P" ' ^- ^""-^ -- firit alint ,d 
 prockimeu, More ntiy onca.rreda fi„geraa,aintt .^,6^/,„6: Novt^thisis arcrydiffe- 
 
 rret'rea:";:^!?Se:"'"""^^'"^'^'''"^^^ 
 
 on^he^noftel^o^rv^^^'l' forGodhitufelf had entailed theKingdoniot ^.iah 
 
 U(u,i...r whenthe.k.ngsSonwasfound, towhom the'Kinodom did belono bv a Di- 
 v,neema,l; =nd bvth.s ,A,;W. iuft:fi« what he did, BeioW, tU KJrTonMl 
 
 byanexprefsdecUtattonotniS Will, and nomination of the Perfon, or Family that 
 ^r! ceofSod-:chX'r''^'''"?'°"?°f ■^"'''•*) S"''i«'>^ -' bound to adhere to' the 
 
 K^nas anden^ HsVe SnJ^ ''"V" °'''" ^'"8^<""^ ■ ''here God makes 
 
 Kings, and entalsthe Crown, not by exprefsnominstior.r but by his Providence the- 
 
 ' B,« fn; linZr J'^T '° •""■'', ^' '° Ciod's Ordinance and Min.fter. 
 
 rod nL,Vr ^ ^ n' l*"' ^"?'-<ii''S to thefe Priric.ples, ail Kings are (et up by 
 
 rlf: lfjrl^.A?^ r^''T '^'"'^''^ """^'"8 Kings w'thout him, HofeaVl °^^^' 
 
 Tti^eTf w^;: '^orr irorth^^ nt^;rf^fuplTL'lr '"^'^ ^^p"^''^" '-r''' ^ 
 
 hi,^(-ei?Kin° wS"A^*" '"'^r'''' '"^° "^^ ^'"'''*'''' S°" of .Te»4,.«, and made 
 ^m fvlLT.t ° .'?PJ'''"°™'"'"<'" 3nd appointtnent, and vet God tells 
 
 throth/rk- nl k"'°''*'^"^' «rf».</.,i^e Pr,-„« o^ermy P ./-/e iy«e/. And a 
 moreth n^7;A"wa7"'"°'"r'T'.^>.'^°''' "or anoinfed by^n; Prophet, no 
 more than Baa/^a was, were yet fet up by God as he was 
 
 'pltetc^rhem o"^, m r a'd here^'ls^n thV^'"?' '"'hfr^' '''"': 
 
 Nrminll„= K '^^f^'^at Line was cut off. tohave confclted God, and re«iv d te 
 Line, andTeA«-s werVrmoff 1 ^' but inftead of that, when JerchamS 
 
 bv hi Prophets thlv fub^-?, ; ,"''°»'"' ''■^ °"lv Kingsna,r,ed by God and anointed 
 a area, fauU fn a Prl^T '" '7' 7^° "'''" """ 'hemfeives over them .- This was 
 ■bv hev ellororthTftT f*;'^ immediateGovernmentof Godi for bere- 
 
 and 
 
 I Kings, 
 tells 15. i74 
 
 l6. 2>
 
 24 ^^^ Cafe of the Allegiance 
 
 and charged with ft as a great Crime, it being in effcd, a renouncing their prcroga: 
 tive, or being God's peculiar People. r t> 
 
 ^ 3. Tojuftify this Dodrine of Obedience and Allegiance to the prefent Powers, there 
 IS an Argument, which IknowfomcMen will not lilce, but muft be a good Argument 
 tothok ttrhomoftfcruplethe new Oath; v\\. That it is founded on the lam? Prin. 
 cipiewiththcDottnneofNo«-re/?y?<f»ceandp*</^t;e-0^rJie«ce, and therefore both muft 
 be true, orbothfalfe; for it is founded on this Principle, That God makes Kings, and 
 invefts them with his Authority; which equally proves. That all Kings, who have re- 
 ceived a Sovereign Authority from God, and are in the equal Adminiftrationof it f which 
 IS the only evidence we have that they have received it from God ; muft be obeyed,, and 
 muftnot be refilt^d. Set afidethis principle, That all Soveraign Princes receive their 
 Authority from God, and 1 grant that Non-rcfiftance is nonfcnfe j forthere is no other 
 irrefiftible Authority, but that of God. if God have given a Sovereign Authority to 
 them, they are immediately his Miniftcrs, and unaccountable to their 5ubjeds i but if 
 theyreceivetheir Authority from Men, and humnn Laws, I cannot imagine, that their 
 Power is 5sny mote than a Trrft, of which they muft give aiHccount to thofe who have 
 cntrufteJ them with it, according to thofe Laws, by which they were entruftcd to exer- 
 cifd that Powc:r ; for whether there be any cxprefs provifion made in the Law to call 
 them to an account or not, the nature of the thing proves, that if they receive their 
 Power from Men, ihfy are accountable to them j tor thofe who give Power, may take 
 an account of the ufe and abufe of it. 
 "•^3' I am fure St P<?«/, who moftexprefly teaches this Dofbrineof Non-refiftance,. joyn 
 thefe two together. Obedience to the prefent Powers, and Non refiftance, and deduces 
 them both from the fame Principle, That ail Power is of God j le/ tvtry foul be fubje^ 
 to ike hightr lowers, for ail Slower is of Gods thePowers that be^ are ordained of God y 
 he therejore that re{i(ieih the ?ower, refijleth the ordinance of God, and they that refijl,fhall 
 receive to themfehes Damnation. 
 
 And Bp. Overal's Convocation Bookt which is lately publillied, the principal dcdgft 
 of which ig to alTert the irrefiftible Authority ot Sovereign Princes, does as plainly afTert 
 this too, That all fetledGovernmentSj whatevertheir beginnings were, have Gods Au- 
 thority, and muft be obyed ; of which, more above; Forthofe wife Men, who fate in 
 that Convocatiotty plainly faw the neceflary connexion between Non-refiftance, and 
 Obedience, to the prefent Powers -, both which were equally refolved into the Authority 
 ®fGod, in removing Kings, and fetting up Kings. Sothat Obedience and Allegiance 
 to the prefent Powers, when they are once well fetlcd among us, is fo far from being a 
 renouncing of the Dodrine of Non.refiftancc and Paflive- obedience, that thofe who re- 
 fufe to comply, muft renounce the only Principle whereon that Dodrine is rcafonably 
 founded, and confequentially renounce the Dodrine it felf. 
 
 4/^/j, To fay. That when the Divine^providence has removed one King, anlfetup 
 another, wemuft not own this new Prince, nor pay the Du^y ofSubjedsto him, if he 
 have no Legal Rioht, is to deny God's Authority to remove Kings, or to fet up Kings 
 againft Human Law 5 for he cannot make a King, if he cannot oblige us to obey him 5 
 fior can he remove a King, ifhc cannot difcharge us from our Allegiance to him j and 
 thofeareboldMen who wiU venture to fay, in plain contradidlon to Scripture, that 
 God cannot remove or fet up Kings. 
 
 ithly. Nay this limits the providence of God, in governing Kings, and protcdlng In- 
 nocent and Irjjurcd 5ubjefts: We fay, the punifhment of Sovereign Princes, who arc 
 ttiuccountable to their Subjcfts, is peculiar tpGod, who is the King of Kings j and 
 
 thus
 
 dueioSovereignTowers.hc, xj 
 
 thus wc ant w€r the Objcaionsagainft Non-Rcfiftance, That if Princes abufc their power 
 God will punifh them for it, and deliver their opprcflcd Subjcds j but it fcems God has 
 noway to do this, but either to turn their hearts, orto take them out of the World, fot 
 he cannot remove them from the Throne :; or if he does, the Subjtas are never the betten 
 for it} for they muf^ not own any other Prince, though he would be never fo kind to 
 them ; but muft bring new calamities upon themfelves by an obftinate adhering to their 
 old Prince, and provoking the new one: This feems very hard, that when God has 
 aaually dtlivercd us, we muft rctufe our deliverancej that we will not allow God to deli- 
 ver us.unlcfshedoitby LavjasHGodwereasmuchconfinedtohnman Laws, as Men 
 are; It is enough, methinks, it weiufl'cr patiently, without violating thcLaws to deliver our 
 felves.; but let God who is above all human Laws, deliver us what way he pkafc. 
 
 kthiy. That which isftil! morcconfiderablc, is the neceflity of Government to prc- 
 Icrve human Societies j for human Societies mufl nor difTolveinto a Aio^,orMr./^oAi»'s 
 ftate of Nature, becaufe the Legal Princehaslcft his Throne, and can no longer govern. ^«.Vf'»''^ 
 BifhopS4»(ier/o« tells us. That the cndofCivil Government, and of that Obedience ««'"'/««'«- 
 which isdue to it, is the Safety and Tranquility of Human Societies j and therefore ///-'%£^I 
 whatever i^ncceHary and ufcful to this end, becomes cm Dutyj for the End prefcribes ^m'^fi^ ,4- 
 the Means. tmus fitri 
 
 opertet^ tn qumtHm ei fini eonfe^uendo nectjfarium vel utile videiitur. CivVis autem regiminUy ejnsque cjti* 'pfi ^''' 
 bita eft obedience, finueft, human* Socetatii falw & trAnejutllitM De Oblig. Confc. lisl. 5. Scftjl9. 
 
 And therefore this Great Man, snd the mo(\ Zealous loja///?^, do own it Lawful for 
 Subjeftstopay fome kind of Submiflion, and Compliance, to LTurped Powers. Let 
 us then examine what it is they allow, and whctherit anfwcrs the great End, which gives 
 Law in all thefe Cafes, The fafety and tranquility of Human Societies. 
 
 They grant then, that we may obey the Laws of fucb a Prince, who has no Right ibid. Se«. 
 or Authority to make them, if they contain nothing which is finful ( which is an excep- ^^» 'T' ^^' 
 lion againllall Laws, whatever Prince makes them ) and may defend our Countrey *^' 
 againf^aForrcignEnemy, may adminifterjuftice to reward the good, and puniOi the 
 wicked, and prefervc the Trade and Commerce of the Nation: But then we muft 
 have no regard to the Authority of the Prince, nor of his Laws ; for he has no Authority 
 and his Laws do not oblige the Confcience ', but we may thus far comply to preferve our 
 felves, our Lives, and Fortunes, andEftates, and for the good of the Community, ancj 
 out of gratitude to the Reigning Prince for his proteftion, and the many Bleffinas the? 
 enjoy under his Government ; though a late "^ titer thinks this gratitude a little too much, 
 and not owing to an \3[uTp,r-, which feems ftrange^ fori will thank any man. and ' 
 makegreatlul Returns too of hiskindncfs, whohaspower ( whateverhis Authority be) 
 to dome hurt, and does me none, but a great deal of good lam forry. Loyalty, whicli 
 i« a very great Vertuei fhould put men out of conceit withany kind or inftances of Grati- 
 tude J which 1 thmk is not a lefs Vertue than that. But tho* 1 greatly reverence the pro- 
 found Judgement of Bi (hop 5«»</er/ow, I cannot be of his mind in this point; iftheSafc- 
 ty and Tranquility of Human Societies requires any thing of us. it both requires and iufti- 
 lies a great deal more. * ' 
 
 ^ i^or I. As he flates the matter, this deflroyes Civil Government, and a governed So- 
 ciety, for hereis neither King, norSubjeft. no Authority to Command, nor Duty to 
 Obeyi an'dJifuppofenoMan. who confidersit well, will call this a Civil Gwern- 
 mcflt, or a Civil Society, to which Authority and Obedience isEifcntial: He would 
 have a Civil Society preferved, this is the fundamental Law of all j but he will allow na 
 Auibofitytofupportit, which « as vain a defign, as to rdolvc to maimain the Super-
 
 i6 T/-?^ Qafe of the tyilkglame 
 
 i%uaiire,l3uttotakeawaythcFoundation. 1 htPnnc. governs by force without Au, 
 f^^^^^^^y^!^-l^^o.^^o.^^^,, withoufafcnrc of Duty, which may 
 hft as long as the Prmc. has pov.er or the Su bjea. are in good Humour, and no iont! 
 
 maniociencs, we rnuft concliide, that ^^hen he removes oneKingourbfthe Thronfl 
 hegiveshis Authonty tohim whomhe places there,- for withbut\utlt6rtty, Human 
 5ocK:tiesmuftd)sband; Po^er may tye them together a while, but can ntver unite them 
 mto a Qvii Body, without the Bands and Ligaments of Duty and Confcienee. 
 
 2 For 1 would ask. Whetncr the care of my own prcfeivation, and the publick Duty; 
 and Qrantude to the Government formy Proteftion, do oblige me in Confcienee to 
 obey and fubmit to the Government, and the Prince who Gavtrns, and to wifli and 
 pray for, and do my utmoU to endeavour their Profperity > if it does. 1 fee no difference 
 between this and Allegiance j and what I am bound in Confcienee to do, I m:w fwearto 
 do 5 Ifitdoes not, then i am at Liberty to difturb the Government, notwithftandin^ 
 
 ;??,^«fr! ' when lean; nay, am under Obligation by my Alkgiance to the Dif. 
 poflcfled Prince, to do it when i can j and how does this contribute to the Safety and 
 Tranquility or Human Societies? 
 
 3. Suppofc then the Governmem docs not think its felffafe, to leave all McnatLibcr. 
 ty to difturb ,t when they pleafe, and whenthcvhavea promifing opportunity to do it, 
 but Ihould require an Oath of Fidelity from them, which, we fee, is the univerfal 
 pra dice ot all Governments 5 what (liall Subjras do in this Cafe ? 
 
 According to thefe Principles, no^ubjed when his Rightful Prince, to whom he 
 owed, or to whom he had fworn Allegiance f which the Bifhop makes the fame Cafe > 
 isdifpolIeiT::', ought rofwear Fic^dity and Allegiance to any other Prince ; and now, 
 thenletusfuppofe, that they all did their Duty, andrefufcd this Oath, a.nd the Prince 
 bad power enough to compel them • what muft be the efFea of this, but the utter* Ruin 
 and Deftrudlionofthe Nation? The Land, indeed, would remain as it was, and where 
 it was, for that can't be removed; but the People of it muft either be deftroycd, orim- 
 prifoned, or trini planted into fomeForreign Countries, as wasformerly praftifcdintbc 
 ^d/?f»'«Conquefts, witnefs the Tf» Trfc,''who were carried away Captive, and the 
 Countrcy new Peopled, andisnotthisa Diflolurionof Human Society^ Andihhepre- 
 fervation of Human Society, be the great ultimate end of Government, and will juftify 
 what it makes neceffary, nothing can be a Duty, which if univerfaily obferved, muft 
 unavoidably in all fuch Revolutions of Government, dcftroy Human SpcieUes* 
 
 For to fa) , That it can never be fuppofed, that all, or the greateft pgirt o^ a;iy ICing*. 
 dom in fuch Revolutions will adhcre^o their Duty, and obftinately refufc to fwear Alle- 
 giance to a new Prince, and that is fufficicnt to prefervc the Nation, tho' fome tew cod- 
 fcientious people fuffei by it, doesnot alter the Cafe j forftili, accord }ng to thefe Prin- 
 ciples, Humane Societies in fuch Revolutions cannot be preferved without Sin j for if 
 allmendid their Duty, they muft all be deftroycd: Now Ibelieveit w.ill b.phardtoper- 
 fwadeany confideringM.cn.that, that which in fuch Cafes is.nccefTary to p^ffcrve a Na- 
 tion,jsa Sin; and that which will infallibly dcftroy it, isa Duty and Vcrtuc iif we allow 
 the fafctyand prefervation of Humane Societes, to be the great Lawjof all. 
 
 4. I obferve farther, that as caun'ousas the Bifhop is. That w^ fhoujd pay Obedience 
 to Ufurped Powers, without owning their Authority; yet he is forced to allow us to do 
 fech things fgf t[ie publick Gogd, as cawigt be done without owning the Auihority i as
 
 7)ue toSovereignTowers, &c. ij 
 
 the Defence of our Country againft a Forreign Enemyi and the Admlniftration of publick 
 Jufticc; foi this muft be done by CommilTion from the King, and, 1 fuppofc, to take 
 a Ccmirirtion from him, owns his Authority, and owns it to be a good Authority j for 
 ifthey hang any Man either by Military Difcipline, or Civil Jufticc, and have not good 
 Authority tor it, they arc Murderers The truth is, to cxercifeali the Afts of Civil Go- 
 vernment, which are necclTary for the Community, without owning the Authority of 
 the Prince, in whofc Name, and by whofe Authority all is tranfa^lcd, is a Riddle to nie> 
 ifwemufthotownthe Authoiity of the Prince, we truft do nothing by his Authority: 
 and then Civil Government in fuch Cafes muftceafe, and Humane 6'ocicricsdiflolve. So 
 that the prefcrvarion of Humane Societies dees of neccfluy force us to own the Authori- 
 ty, even ot U/«y/?ei Powers ; and if the prercrvation o\ Humane Societies be the end of 
 Civil Goveinmcnr, and thercafon of that Obedience which wc owe to Government, as 
 the r/y?jo/>aflcrtsj then when an obftinate Allegiance to the Difpoflcded Prince rr.uft 
 dKTolve Civil G'overnmenr, the reafon of that Allegiance ceafes j and therefore that Al- 
 legiance muft be at an end j and when AllegianeetoOfurped Powers, is ncccflary tothe 
 prcfrrvaticnof the Society, it muft become a Duty. 
 
 5. The B/7^oj7refolvcs all this into the prefumed Confcnt of the ejected Prince, that 
 hisSubjcds Qiould rather confulc their own fa^rty by a modcft compliance with the pre- ^^' ^^^ 
 icnr Powers, than bring certain Ruin upon tbcmfelvcs by an unfeafonable Oppofition; ^^' 
 Now the' 1 con'efs, 1 lay no ftrcfsupona prefumed Ccnfent j yet if wc will prcfume, 
 we Hiould prcfume all that is reafonable, that is, all that is neccflary for the prefervation 
 of his Subjects, when he can govern them, and prottft them nolcnj^crj and then wc 
 may prcfume his Confcnt to Oaths of Allegiance and Fidelity, when rh=s LsncctlTary to 
 their prefervation j and 1 can very eafily picfumc, that Princes think thfsa kfs fc^ult, than 
 lome Subj'disdo, they know what they thcmd Ives expect from Subjeds, where they 
 have Power, whatever their Right be, and therefore cannot complain of their vSubjcds, 
 i( they pay it to another Prince, in whofe Power they arcj this i:. the pradice of the 
 whole>jrorld, and Princes know it; and may asreafonably beprtfumed toallowit, a» 
 3ny other Ad of Obedience and.Subjedion to Ufurpcd Powers. Andtho* i will not 
 med^ile with that Queftion, Whether a King's leaving his Kingdom in a great Frighf> 
 without anyone to Govern and Proted his Subjcds, be to al' intents and purpoft;s an 
 Abdication of the Government ? Yetone may reafonably prefume,that aKingwhofor- 
 fakes his Kingdom to confuli his own Safety, will give his Subjcd§ leave to confuk theirsj. 
 if this wi'l juftify a King to favc himfelf by leaving his Kingdom ; why will it not juftify 
 Subjtds, when their King has left rhem, to fubmit and comply with the prevailing 
 Powers, asfar as isneccftary toprefervethemfelves ? That iS; even by Oathsof Alle- 
 giance, if that be neccfliry : Self p-cfervationisas much a Law to 5uS|eds, as to the 
 Princes and he is as much fworn ro Govern and Proted hisSubjcds, as they are to 
 Obey and Defend him ; anj if the necefHties of Self-prefervation abfolve him from his 
 Oath o' governing and prote-ding his People 5 I dt fiie tolcnow, why the fame necefli- 
 ty will not abfolve Suhjcds from thirir Oaths to their Prince? Protedion and Allegiance 
 are not io reciprocal, as to be the neccflary Conditions of each other;, that if a Prince 
 violate his Oath of Governing bv Law, andinftead of PiOted'ngdoes Opprefs his Sub- ' 
 Jeds, Subjt'ds^re then freed fronuheir Oath of Allegiance, and may take Arms againft 
 their Prince; tor tho' Protedion and Defence are the Duties of Relatives, ola Prince 
 and his Subjcds 5 yet they arc not necefTarily fuch Relative Duties, as that neither of 
 them can be performed unlcfs both be. % Prince may govern by Law, andprotcdlhis 
 SttbjeAs j *Hd yet in Fa^ they deny their Allegiance to him j and Sub jeds may pay theiir
 
 x3 The Cafe of the Allegiance 
 
 Allegiance to their Prince when he Oppreffes them , thefe Duties 'may be diftin^lljr and 
 feparatelyobfeivcd, and therefore do not in their own Nature, cither infer or deftroy 
 each other. But Government and Allegiance are fuch Relatives, zsdomutunfe^onere ct* 
 tollerci the one cannot fubfift without the other: if the Prince can't Govern, theSub- 
 jcft can't Obey i and therefore; as far as he quits his Government, he quits their Allegi- 
 ance, and Icaveshis5ubje£lsas he does his Crown, to be pofTcfled by another, and mud 
 recover them both together. He may have a Legal Right to both, but he cannot aftu« 
 ally have the 5ubjcds Allegiance without the Crown j nor can f<ubjcfts pay him their Al- 
 legiance, without his being reft ored to the Pofltllion of his Throne, no more than they 
 canobey, when he can't command ; orfubmit, whcnhehasno Power to govern ; or 
 defend his Pcrfon and Crown, when he has withdrawn his Pcifon, and leh his Crown. 
 This Is as certain as any propofition in I-ogicA j and to extend Allegiance beyond the 
 Aftual Adminiftration or Govetnmtut, is to prcferve a Ke/ui/rr without hs Comlate 
 for when one o( the Relatives is loft, theRe/<t/<o»is deftroyed, andnothingbut theMc- 
 mory of it left, 
 
 6ihh\ Thefe Principlesanfwer all the cn^s of Government, both for the fecurity of 
 the Prince and Subje;ts, and that is a good Argument to believe them true. 
 
 A Prince who is in Poftcffion, is fccured in Poffcftion by them, (as far as any Principles 
 canfccurehim) againft all Attempts of hisSubJcds, who muft reverence Gods Autbo* 
 rityinhim; and fubmit to him without Befiftince, though they are ill ufed. 
 
 They will not indeed ferve t he Revolutions of Government, to remove one King, and 
 fetupanother, andif they would. Princes might be jealous of them; for whatever 
 Service they might do them at one turn, they might do them as great Diflervice atano. 
 tbcr : The Revolutions of Government are not the 5ub)cfl:s Duty, but Gods Prerogative 5 
 and therefore it is not likely that he has prefcribed any certain Rules or Methods for the 
 overturning and changing Government, which he keeps in his own hands, and which 
 when he fees fit to do it, heneverwants ways and means of doing. 
 
 But when any Prince is fetled in the Throne, by what means foever it be , thefe PrinJ 
 ciplcs put an end to all difputes of Right and Title, and bind his Subjefts to him by Duty 
 and Conlcience, and a reverence of God's Authority ;; which is the fafteft hold he can 
 |)oflibly have of them ; for thofe whom Religion will not bind, nothing but Force can. 
 
 And therefore thefe are the only Principles which in fuch Revolutions can makeGo- 
 Ternment eafic both to Prince and People ; anc if Government muft be prefcrved in all 
 devolutions, thefe arc the beft Principles which are moft for the eafe and fafety of it. 
 
 But on the other hand, fuch an immoveable and unalterable Allegiance, as is thought 
 dae only to a Legal Right and Title, and muft be paid to none, but to a Legal and 
 IRightful Prince, ferves no ends of Government at all ^ but overturns all Government, 
 when fuch a Prince is difpofTcfTed of his Throne, how long foever he continue difpofTcf- 
 fcd ; and what long Inter-regnums may this occafion, to the difTolution of Human 
 Societies ? 
 
 If you fay that this is the bcfl: principle to prevent all Revolutions of Government, when 
 It isknown,that Subjefts are bound in Conlcience not to fubmit to any Illegal and Ufurp- 
 ingPowersj andthisis very much for the peace and fecurity of Humane Societies; I 
 anfwer. 
 
 1, Jfthisprinciplewould prevent all Revolutions of Government, it is ademonftra- 
 
 tlonagainftit, that it is a bad Principle, ameer Human Invention, which cannot come 
 
 ■ from God. For fincc God has referved to hirgfelf his Sovereign prerogative of removing 
 
 Kings, aodfctting up Kings 3 ilncc this is romeucnes ncceftaryfor the prcfcryatioB of 
 
 the
 
 due to Sovereign Towers. &c, . a ^ ^ 
 
 the Church, anc! the deliverance of the Good from OppreiT^on and Tyranny, and forth- juft 
 Punifhment cither of King or People j it is impoOiblc that he fhouid giveany fuch Lawsto 
 mankind, as Pnall debar him from the exercifcotthis Prerog=itivf, in what way hep.eales,- 
 yet it is certain Q.A cannot make Kin^s, if he cannot oblige Subjtas to obey them j and that 
 he cannot do, if ihevmuft obey and fubmit only to Legal Kings. / j l 
 
 2. Itisevidcnt, Thatrhis Princiole was either unknown to the Word before, (andthat 
 is an argument rhat it is not the natural fenfe of mankind) oreHe, bat this Irincip.e can- 
 not prevent the Revolutions of Government j foJ there havebctnfuch Revolutious mall 
 Ages, and I believe will be to the end of the World {■ 
 
 3 Sincetbcnfuch Revolutions will happen, fuch Principles as n.uft diflolve Humane 
 Societies, when fuch Revolutions happen, orexpofeihe mufl inn^ctnr and cc nfoemicus 
 men to the greateft Sufferings, without ferving any gaod end by thim. cannot oetiue ; 
 for the end of Government is the Prefervation of Humane Scdcties, and ihere'ore thai can 
 be no good Principle of Government, which in any turn of affairs, if puifued, muft ail- 
 folvc Humane Societies, . 
 
 Korean that be a true Principle, which at any time obliges honcfl men to lofe their 
 Lives, their Ef^ates, their Liberties, in oppofition to the Government of the Nat ion where- 
 in they hvc, when they may preferve them all by Obcditnce and Subm flion to tht Govern- 
 m.':nt: lam furethe Scripture teaches us to fuffer patiently in Obedience to Government, 
 but not to fuffer in Oppofition to if : And when the very reafon of our Obedience to Go- 
 vernment, is for the prefervation of Humane Societies, and that we our fdves may enjoy 
 the Bleftings of Government, itfcems very flrange toextend this Duty to the overthrow of 
 Humaae Societies, and to deny our felvcs the Security and the Be flings of Government^ 
 which is to extend a Duty to fuch cafes, as contradict the only Reafon, whereon that Duty 
 is founded. 
 
 It is true, we muf^ in all cafes be contented to fuffer in doing our Duty ; for we mufl chufc 
 rathertofuffcr than to fin; and it is no Argument that any thing ceafesto bemy Duty, bc- 
 caufelt expofesme toSuf^^'ering: But then we muft be very fure that it is our Duty, that it is 
 cxpreflyenjoynedusby the Laws of God or Nature, before we venture to fuffer for it ; But 
 when wc arc to learn our Duty, net fromany exprefs Lawof God or Nature, but from the 
 Reafon and Nature of things, it is a fufficient Argument, that is not my Duty, which will 
 expofe me to great bufferings, without ferving any good end ^ nay, whichexpofes meto 
 Sufferings, for contradiding the natural end and intention of that Duty, for which 1 pr<;tend 
 to fuffer. 
 
 4. But let us grant that this Principle is the beft Secutltyto the Rights of Princes j is the 
 Right of any Prince fo Sacred as tofland in Competition with the very being of Humane So- 
 cietics.and the fafety and prefervation of all his Subj:d1s? And muft we then defend a Prince's 
 Right, with the deftrutVion of the Nation, and theRuineofall hisSubje(fls? Whichis moft 
 necefTiry, That the Nation fhould be governed, or. That fuch a Prince fhould govern it* 
 Andifhebedrivcnout of his Kingdoms i and cannot govern, muft we then have no Go- 
 vernment > Orhowfhallthe Nation be governed, ifSubjefls are bound in confcience to 
 obey, and pay Allegiance to no other Prince? This is to make all mankitid the ilaves and 
 and Properties of Princes j as if all men were made for Princes, not Princes lor the govern- 
 ment of men. 
 
 This, I think, is abundantly fufficient to juftifieour Obedience and Alleoianee to the 
 prefent Powers, though it fhould at any time happen, that the Legal and Rightful Prince 
 fhould lofe his Throne. 
 
 But there is a great prejudice againft all thi^; for fo I call it, rather thananObjcftion^ 
 for there is no Argument ia it, norcanit bcformed imoanArgumcuti 'vi\. rhat this will 
 
 K equally
 
 -VheQaje of the i^llmame 
 
 equally ferve aimv^uaony>f^c>yen.men^^ 
 n.,ghr fubmit and fw.ar to a R..^^P../,,^;e„t, or to another ?mt,Fi,y, or to zCnLuTtt, 
 vf safety, or whatever eife you pieale: Andyet unJer thatUfa.-p.uion, the Lovnl Nobihr 
 G,m.y, and Clergy thought thc..ire ves bound in Confckncc to cppcfethat l]fuvp,icn at 
 then- urnioft pcnU And ili.ll we Arra^on rhem all, as rcfiaina God's Ordinance by then- op 
 pohnon cothok Ufurped Powers, and their attempts tc r.ftme^hdrKinpto histhrcK ^^ 
 This, aslobjrved, is a greatprqudice, but. no Armament, for if thvfe Principles be 
 true andaccord.ngtothdeFrinciples they might have complied witbthcfe Ulqrpa-ions: 
 that they did not, is no confutation of them. f F« xv io, 
 
 Butyet,irupporc,alUkn fee a vaft difference between there two Cafes; it is evident 
 thofe Loyal peifcns, both of the Clergy and Laity, who fuffered in the former Gaufe, and 
 have nowcotnphed with the pref€ntGovi:rnriient, thinkthere is a vaft difference between 
 them i and mud thmk themfclves m jre reproached and injured bv (uch a Corr.parifon, than 
 bv iuch Principles as )ufl:ify their preknf compliance: And the great Body of thcNob'!->v 
 Gentry, and Uergy. wno have furorn Allegiance to their ^^^^^^^^ Majcfties, would take it 
 very ill to be thought lefsLoya! than thofe «.ere, who fuffered for King Charlesl, and II 
 underthof^U.urpersj and tnerefore they alfo mull apprehend a vaft difference between 
 thefctwocales. 
 
 But what is it that mnkesthis difference > If you will -allow the fuppofltion , That the 
 Rightful King IS difpoflcffed ; arid that in fuch a cafe it is lawful to comply with any Govern, 
 ment, which becomes the fetled Government Qf the Nation ^^ ^ 
 
 lanfwfrs The difference IS very great upon all accounts- and that no man may wonder 
 at the obftmata Loyalty of thefedayes, and the eafie and ready compliances now , (from 
 whence fome men conclude a renouncing the Principles of the old Church of E^iglan^ 
 Loyalty, to the great fcandal of Religion,) 1 Hiall fhew the difference upon many accountsj 
 and all together wil! dc more than anfwer enough. 
 
 I Fivftthen, The great Villanies of rhofe days, inan open and bare fac'd Rebellion, 
 perHftcd m a Iter th^/oo ft Gracious Offers and Condefcenrions ; and in the Barbarous Mur- 
 derof oneor theueft Pr.ncesin the World, wascnouoh to prejudice \V,fc and Goldmen, 
 againft all complianccs,thouuh they had been lawful ,-"for who, that could pofl^bly avoid it, 
 would fubmit to such men- .. r j 
 
 2. The barbarousUf.ige the King's Friends met w-'th, i^ade a 5i'.bmiffion and Comply 
 anceufelefsandimpoflible: Thofe who hndfouaht for thdr King, or cxprcffcd anydiflike 
 of thefe Proceeding?, whom they had any jealoufie or fufpicionof, or whofe Eftates they 
 hadamindtopofTerstheffifrlvfsof, were plundered, fequefired , imprifoned , forced to 
 fculk and hide at home, or fiie abroad, to preferve their Lives and' Liberties. 
 
 3. Bijho^s, Deans, ^nd Prebendaries wac turned om, and their Lands and Revenues 
 foldj the Loyal Ckrgy were M^%„^«/f for what they bad donej and had noway to keep 
 their Livings. dp>eclally if they wereofany Value, but by renouncing the Church of £«ir. 
 Und, as well as by Subm^fflon to that Government, which 1 believe, notwithflanding their 
 ready compliance in taking the Oaths, ihcClergyat this day would more univerfally have 
 refufed, than they did thfn 
 
 41%. Another difficukv was, that the whole Government both of Church and State 
 wasoverturned, which was the Fundamental Conflitution of the Nation: The Kingwas 
 not only Murdered, and the Rightful Heirdriven out of the Land, but the Monarchy it felf 
 Urasdeftroyed, and neither King, Lords, nor Commons, left 5 but a few of the Houfe of 
 Comm.ons, who by Force and Power had turn'd the reft out of doors, undertook to govern 
 t^l, inthename of the Commons of £wg/4«rf; which was fuch an Invaiion on the Rights 
 at^Libcrtkspt tbeirCowmry Cwlaicharcas faacdasths^ightsof theKini^,) asrcquireci
 
 7)tie to Scveraj^n Tourer s, 8cc. 
 
 tK^utmoff oppofition that could be mad'fe; ' And it may be, if it be Well confideved, the 
 Defence <>i A^.on.uch)', and the Rigi.tsand Prerogative^ of the Crown, will appear a very 
 material part ut ihe Oath of Allegiance, which may bind Subjc^ls when the lerltn of the 
 King Is changed J and may m^ktfhcm think themfelves mere cb!ig(d to reftcrc fueh a 
 I'rin e, when they cannot reftcrc Monaichy, and the Aniient Laws and Government cf the 
 Nation wi:h€u,t him. 
 
 51%. And ir.orever it fsplain,That their Government was never fctled ; it was frequently 
 changed, and new modelled, which was no Argument of Settlement j and which is mere 
 than that, they had not a National Gonlent and Submifilon. 
 
 Men, who were forced, fubmitred to force; but the Nation did not by any Na^ ional Ad- 
 ever own them ^ for 1 think the Rump Parliament, who wcri- the Ufurpers themfelves; or 
 fome little p ickt Conventicle s,^ rather than VatUamenis, could not be called the Reprefenta. 
 /mjjoUhe- Nation, 
 
 — ^his fcerns to be much like the Cafe which BiJJoop Overal' s Convocatinn-Book mentions 
 'in relation to ^miochu6; whahad by force k:pt the ]en>s in fubjcdion tor f^jme years, and 
 yet when Matthias took Arms in.dcfence of their Rtltgion, they juftify fhis Adion by iaying 
 That the Government o^-^«//of^/« was not fetled among them, either by i> nbmi^fion ot 
 Continuance -J that is, tho' People were forced to fubmlt to Power, hisGovernTient was 
 not owned byanypub'ick National ^ubmiHson -, and in fuch Cafes along Continuance is 
 required to fettle a Governmentj whereas a N>itional Submiifion fttdes a Government \n 
 a Qiort time ; as we may conclude from what they tell us of the Settlement of ^lexandif^s 
 Govemmcnc among the Jem, who was but a very little while with themj hmjaddm 
 theH/j^^.Py/e/?, and the Governing part of the Nation fubmitting to him, this fetJed his 
 GorernHient in a few days, 
 
 Thisfliewshnw unlike all this was to our, prefent Cafe in every particular 5 that thcfe 
 who thought it their Duty never to fub(r.it to th.it wicked Ufarpation, are now fatisfied, 
 that they may fubmit w'rth a good Gonfcienee to their prcfdnt Jvlajeflies. 
 
 In our prefent Cafe, alFthings are quite contrary to what they w^erc ia the former 5 every 
 thing concurred to makcrhe Nation fond of fuch a Change, and very eafy under it. 
 
 Kingjtfwff, more, Ihope, by follov/ingill Counfels, thanby hiscwn Inclination, bad 
 cffcdually removed all Prejudices and Objxaionsagainft fuch a Revolution, excepting the 
 Obligaffons of Duty and Confcience. 
 
 In the late times of Rcbehonand ururpation, altthe friends of Monarchy, andofthe 
 Engli/k Government, and of the Church of England, and of the Liberties of their Country, 
 and oftheir own Honouisand Fortunes, were bound in Intercft to take all Opportunities 
 toreftorctheKing. In our late Rcvoiution, the very fam.^ Reafonsand interefts difpofed 
 all M n to 'be wery well contented to part with their King, if they had known how to do ic 
 honeftly; for the Continuance of his Government, by the bold Steps, and extraordinary 
 Methods he had taken, gave them gieat App.chenflons that all thefe were in danger, even 
 theRightsandPrcrcgativesofihe Crown itfelf ( the prefcrvatidn ofwiiich w'asamain 
 end of the Oath of Allegiance ) by his. Sufem-itionto the Se.^. oiU^ome, and rejectincT the 
 03^0^ Supremacy, andasfaras hccould. abfolvinghis Subjeasiromit 5 and yetin^hatr 
 Oath alone, we Swearto the ZL^v./k/ Suxrcefior, in Opppfirion to the pretences of the BiHiop 
 otRowe, todepofe, andfetupKinnsatpieafure, for the Service of the Chu'-ch 
 
 This helpt fome Men eafilytoabfolve themfelves !rom the Obligation of their Oaths-, for 
 they could not think. thatOaths, which were made and impofed for the Ptefervation cfa 
 Pme/?tf»^ Prince, and the Proteftant Rfghts and Liberties of Church and State, could 
 ob^gethcm to defend and maintain a Prince in hisUrurpatJons, as they thought on both, 
 
 ihisfivade ^isSubjcOs aad even his-A.*mydcferr;his Service, when the Prince came 
 
 :. witbf
 
 The Cafe of the Allegiance 
 
 With a forreigtiForcc; and this made it neceffiry for him to leave the Kingc^om, and to 
 leave his Subjects in the Hands ot the P rincc j which made an eafie way for the Prince to be 
 placed on the Throne. 
 
 Now not to difpute the legality of all this, here was nothing fo formidable, as ; o prejudice 
 an honeft Man againft^ubmiffion and compliance, astherewasin the late times ot Rebel- 
 lion; nothingthat could rcafonably hinder a con^pliancc, but sn Opinion, that we muft 
 never pay Allegiance to anv but a Legal Kingj and poffibly had that point beenwavedj 
 no Proreftant would have difpured a quiet and cheariul fubmillion to the Government. 
 
 To fight'againft a King, ano: not to fi^ht tor him, I think arc two very different things^ 
 and when K-inasmikeit impoiri.>leto ^:i\n ^or them, witboUr fighting .igainft ihe Religion 
 and Liberties of ourCoun'ry, they may thank thfmfelves, ilthcir ubjcdscannot deknci 
 them. This is a danger- us lUte IM.ices bring chcmfrlvesinto, efpccially where there are 
 different pcf(wafions in a Nation : sJ^ncnfomc Men think, rhey may Lawfully defend 
 their Religion and Liberties againil the (Ifurparionsol their Prince j and others think, they 
 are not bound to defend and maint.^in tbtii Prince in hislIlcg.U tJfurpationson thcirRciigion 
 and Liberties J for a little cppoficion without any defence will quickly rum any Prince. To 
 take a Crown from a Prince, andhisLiberry and Life with it, and to fuffcr him to leave his 
 Crown if he plifafes, andtodcfert hisGyvtrnment, arcfwo very different things. 
 
 I cannot indeed think(neither do I believe>that any body elfe does) that for a King to leave 
 his Ore wn and Government in afright is in all cafes nect iTarily to be interpreted fuch an Abdi- 
 cation as isequivalent toa voluntary Refignation ;,• whereby he renountes all future Right 
 and Claim to it. Burif he have reduced himfelf to fucha flate, that he is forced for his 
 own prctervation to leave his Kingdom and Government i it is plain, that in forae fcnfc 
 he leaves his Throne Vacant too, that is, there is no body in it, nobody in the Adual Ad- 
 niinifcration of the Government. 
 
 Thusfar I think Subjects maybe veryguiltlefs, who do not drive the King away, but 
 only fuffer him quietly to cfcape out of his'Kingdoms ; for this is no Rebellion, no Refinance, 
 hm on^Y Non-^fftfiaticey which may be very innocent ; for there are fome cafes, whereia 
 Subjects are not bound to allift their Prince; and if ever there were fuch a cafe, tbiswasit. 
 
 WbatthenfhallSubjcds do, whenthe King is gone, and the Government DifTolved, 
 the People left in the Hands of another Prince, without any Reafon, or any Authority, or 
 «ny formed Power, tooppofehim > The Government muft be Adminiftrcd by fomc body 
 uniefs we can be contented, that the Rabble fhould Govern. 
 
 But Ifhallnot meddle with that Interval, bet ween the going away of the King, and the . 
 Prince's coming to the Throne ; but only confidcr him as placed in the Throne, and fettled 
 there. And now we can find no alteration in the Ancient Government of the Nation,but 
 only the exchange of Pcrfons; and all things concur to make this a very advantageous 
 and acceptable Change, excepting fuch difficulties, as ufually accompany fuch Revolutions, 
 
 TheAiowdy/A^sisthefamefiill, and the TJE>reee/?rfrey of the Nation the fame ; theChurch 
 ofEttgUnd, and the Laws; and Liberties of the Nation fccured,- and no profpe^ of fecur- 
 ing them by any other means ; fothat here is nothing to prejudice any Man againfV the 
 prefcnt Government, orto makethc Reftorationof th-' difpoflcflcd Prince neccffary, as 
 there was in the late Ufurpation, but only a miftaken Notion of Allej^iance to that Prince, 
 whom we fuppofe to have the Legal Right though he be difpofKlTed, and another Eftab- 
 hfhed in his Throne ; which 1 have already proved to be a miftake. 
 
 But not to difpute the Legal Right ( which is nothing to my prefent purpofe ) here is a 
 fettled Government, which was not in the former Cafe, 
 
 Their prc(cntM<i;e/?/e5 are in the full Polfeffion of the Throne, and Adminiflratioii of 
 the Government by a National fubmilEon andconfcntj for though fomc Men difpute, 
 
 whether
 
 duetoSoveretgnTowers.. &c, 
 
 whether a Convention of the Eftatcs, not calico by the Kings Writ be a legal Parliament, 7i 
 yetallMcnmuftconfefs, that they are the Rrprffcntativcs of thcNatirnj orclGra Nation 
 can havenoKeprtfcntativeSi when it has no King in thcThrunc, Oi when there is any dif- 
 pute about the Title to the Grown. 
 
 Now, though this might be improved farther, I fliall content my fclf only to fav ; that 
 the confentancTfubmiflion of the Convention, cfpeciallywhtn confirmed by fuLftqufnt 
 
 Parliaments, is a National Aft, and mokes a Settlement of the Goveinmcnt,crpaialb ^'f^^ 
 thegencralityofthcNationhavefo willingly and cbearfullyfubmitted^and bound their Alle- 
 giance by Oathjwhich is a very different thing from fubmitring to meer ferce,when tfac incli- 
 nation of the Nation ftands bent another way j when there is nothing but meer force, it may 
 admit fomedifpute, when the Governmci^t is fettled ; but though in fome cafes, it may be 
 bardto ietcrminc, when the Government is fofettkd, as to make Allegiance due j this is 
 no reafon to deny Allegiance, when there is a vifible Settlement. It this be not a fettled Go- 
 vernment, 1 know not what is i I am (ure, we have realon to pray for the continuance oi 
 it; when nothing can unfettle it, but fuch a Power, as will overturn our Reigion and Li- 
 berties with it. It isindecd commonly faid, asl obferved before, that the fubmiffionor 
 the I'cople without the fubmiflion of the Prince, cannot transfer the Government j by 
 which they may mean the legal Right of Government : No w to avoid unnecelTary Dilputes 
 fuppofe this were trae ; yec the fubmifCon of the People, when their Prince has left thrm, 
 if it cannot give a legal Right to snoiher Prince, yet it may give an aftual Sfttlenrent.to 
 him ; and that is all we arc enquiring after. This I think is a fufficient anfwcr to that odious 
 Comparifon between the late Ufurpations, and this prcfcnt Revolution. 
 
 1 Diall conclude the whole with anfwering an Objedion, which many, who refufc the ObjtB» 
 'Oaths, place great confidence in ^ and that is from the Laws of the Land ; In all fuch cafes 
 as thtfe, the Laws, they fay, are the meafuve of cur Duty, and the Rule of Confcience, and 
 therefore we muftcwn no King, but whom the Law owns to be King 5 that is. in an He- 
 reditary Monsichy, the right Heir; and to pay and fwear Allegiance to any other Prince, 
 though pt (Tcfled of the Throne, when the rightful King is difpofTcfled, or the right Heir 
 living, is contrary to cur duty toGcd, becaufc contrary to the Laws of the Land 
 
 1, InanfwertothislconfiJeri this is no real Objcdionsgainft any thinglhave faid j but ^nftf* 
 allthatlhavefaidjifitprovenue.isafufficientanfwertothis; The Laws ofthe Land are the 
 Rule of Confcience,when they do noccontradift the Laws ofGod: but when they do, they 
 are no Ruletousj but their obligation mufl give place to a Divine Authority. SuppoG thf n 
 there were an exprcfs Law, that the Subje^sof H/J^/a«<ifhould ownnoKing, butthc right 
 Heirj and notwithftanding this Law (asit willfometimeshappen, and has often happened 
 \r\ England) a Princr who iscrottherightHeir, fhould get into the Throne, and fettle hiixi* 
 felf there.' If the Divine Law in fuch a c.ife, commands usto pay all the obedience and duty 
 of Subjefts, to a Prince in the aftualpofTcdion of the Throne, and the Lawof the Land 
 forbidsit, which muft we obey, the Law of God, or the Law of the Land ? This I think 
 IsoodlfputCj andthereforeitisin vaintour(»ctheLawsof the Land in any cafe, wherewc 
 are under a Superior Authority: let them firft prove that no King is fct up byGodagainfl: 
 the Laws of the Land ^ and then I will confcfs, wemuflownnone but legal Kings, foe 
 we muft own no Kings, whom God does not make, and who have not Gods Authority. 
 
 2.1 he Englifh Monarchy is Hereditary, &: the lineal Heir has the legal R'ahrio the Crown; 
 grant this but f^ill we maf^ confider how far this is a Law to all private Subjcds^how fsr every 
 5tjbjeft is bound by this Conftitution, to give the PofTefTion of the Crown to the r;ght Heir, 
 and not to fufFer any one elfe to rake it j or if he do,not to pay Allegiance to hirr, cr own him. 
 for his King. What Law is there, that faycsthis ? And I think, the reafon of the thing docs not 
 prove it.ThcLaw docs not rcfci the Cognj^ance of fuch matters to private Sab jc^s jand tbcrc- 
 
 L fore
 
 a legal Conftituiion. Legal Rightsmuftbrd, r;l?„Lu •',"°',''fS^'''^''"«'''ni«»t* 
 Authority can tiSkc Cognizance ofche Ti,l4and ci^fm !p "'' '^"'''^'''^ ' '"^ =»^« '-' ™ 
 Crown-, but the £/?«,« of the Rclm.- Thnfn^i.j "m'"'?' ^"^ the difpofel of th6 
 Cefcent ol the Crown, mi if throuob mifirt' „, ^'•' °i'l'g!'^ to take notice of -he legal 
 a wrong Hca<i.thcy n,uft anfwer io.-^tut^^^llt'^'''^^' •'^''' <■« ">< Crown Upon 
 of the matter, ire bound by no Law hat I kl ■^^^^' ""ho have no legal Cognizanct 
 have owned, though they fhould think the RtuT,°n'fl°*';/^*'!S' «'^«"' the £/?a,« 
 rule private Subkftsinthefecafes, evr,^ a„3 1^"" "• ^^Authority may not over, 
 .her Obedience to a King, who is placed t ^ T" P'ri'' °P'"'°"^' ^''-^ i"ftifi« 
 who have ,,0 Authority to Judge, andno Power to Kem''Ti:'"^^'"' '"^^"V "'"("e 
 wherein Subieasmuftacquiefce in the dete-mrl,,-(, T''"' ^'^ "umerous C;,fcs, 
 mink a legal Right : The'reafon and „ec rn^™'f"r ' ''S'''^"'''ority,goinft „hat,he; 
 whichgivtsaR.oht, will not allow u,,n It °'"""'"' '"I"'^«»i '"J the Law. 
 And therefore it d-oes not follow nTerlv^.o;;^''';^','""' ^f^' '^g'-t^ k^' Authoritv.' 
 bound mC»»/-«eMe to cwnnoKinc L,°? ''",^"' of Succeffion, that Subjifts are 
 fcience in Obedience to ],,ws, isthe^^nk ,bin"?ll, '^^'^"'. ""'' ^"'^ Duty and Con. 
 
 J , T4,o- ! have not skill enou»h in LaJ 1 """^ "'?'"'''"8 '^'"• 
 in this point ; yet it is the declared TuH.c *'„° f?"!; "V'T J: '"}'' <"" Conftitntion allow, 
 and fo far as, can learn, .hemoftcorrmr/„^r , '''/^''^ ^-'•'Vers o( fo'"'" days, 
 a'low andrequire Allegiance to a KtnTr/' a " ?"'"-''"!,^ J^"'"" '^'"' ^''"«'^'- Laws do 
 Ugal Right. And,his^he) ha ve d o.^t-^^tp^t'' 'i f '^ 
 
 CA, ]4. CmU the Ju.%esinE*.„r Caf^ J!' ^''^^ ''L^'''/"'' '■'S'^-'f"' Kings, as my Lord 
 .B»,i£»;«in,l,eTryal oltheRcufcdes inf '^ °' ^''' J"^ ""'"' "'V ^"^-^ f* ]«]?. 
 but would no, alio; his Cafe to be w thi.^ theT" • " '^7'''' 'l" ' "'«' ='"°*''J '^e Law 
 nreerly about the Senfe of the taw. TjudiChT^K- u^°"' '^^'" ''^' I'''"!'"'' i' 
 and a great deal more thani can pretend to^w!'l*''^t*a ''"I"'''" f™«killi„Law. 
 fcience! Whether to adhere tomvoJ„Tj '"''" '!''=« "^y to rcfolve my Con. 
 
 of the ableft Judgrs and Lawyers, *^orTo !^.7""!r'.'S;>'nft thejudgements and Opinions 
 
 generally agree in It ),hoU not c;mpXndIhrR^rn ^''^T-Z' < *''^" '"'"^^ "'» 
 In tnoral and nitural Duties, whicS /„, 'Z^"'^°"' °'l^"' 0|>'ni"ns > 
 
 the Cafe is different; we muft not here r^f u "n™''' '"1 '^"'* ""^"^'^^ f<" hinrfelf. 
 the Reafon and Sentiments of our own M „Y »'holly upon Authority, efpecially not againft 
 ovcr-tulemeer Doubts and Scruples k' Ik I n r "T^'' '? '''" ^^'' °f S'"' ■"<"« "> 
 law, andweconcludethattobeomDn^iu^r'^ ?**"''''""'" """ P«'"' °f 
 That Tu jges and learned Lawyers Xdal I J ' t \'^ ^««™'"«, I am o( Opinion. 
 
 anyByafsonthem, oranyp^^fpiof ou '^n"r" a'I^"'"^"^^^^^ 
 
 they underftand the taw bell. *^" prefent Affairs, are the beft Cajuijls, becaufe 
 
 That we muft obey and fubmit fn ,v... D • . _ 
 enjoyn ; and we muft not fufft a„° m,!"^^ ^^'"'' "'''^ '•■' ^»*» "^'^"^ ""<! N«u.:c 
 this is not our Duty: But what Prfncrw-mnftk ''"''" f^'T""' f"P"-f'»''<ie us, tbat 
 muft pay our Allegiance, theLawof&^,dl, '''„' i*" T""' P'"'"''^"- P^nce we 
 raws of the land. Here is a Queftiotuhen 1 T "iw u' "u" '','"'l'i'«'^n'uftl«tn from the 
 fuchaCafe happens) muftX hd^Allo ' ^.•'"•'"'heSubj.as of E«gU«d ( whin 
 his Throne, or io the King rfriarwhn i '^T^' J^'"^ ^'>''"- ''^°'" "'Vflifedof 
 wilthefeMen, whogroufj hef DiJentZ'n^'^'f'^ '' f'^''""' ^^'S^' ^'^"- ^ow 
 fionofthetaw? Kthey will,"o Wlw d.^r • r^'" °' '*" ^*"'^' abide by the Deci. 
 Objeftion! IftheywiH, Who mrftTnlrri! .°T' ^'"."^ ""^"^ ''• ^"" ""'»'»'«"«= 
 piufttheylcarnit; fotewyLTL,/" ' ''' f'"/'°f"'' ^=«'. an<l from whom
 
 T)fie to^overeiguTowers, Sec. 5^ 
 
 tcffwell undfiftandsthc Grammatical Scnfeand Conftrudiono{ VSJ'ords, And Is It not 
 mcft reafonable to think that to bt the Setifc of the Law, vhich leaf ned Judges and Lawyers 
 have agreed is the Scnfe cfit ? hit not rtdcnablctotskc that to bethe StnTcof the 1 ftw, 
 which has been the Senfc ot We/?7m>*/?€rH<*//, and is! ike to be fo ?gain, ifwethmk fit to 
 try it? 
 
 Idonotthinkitfodangercustomiftakeina humasi Law, as in natural or divine Laws: 
 curObhgjticntoobey human Laws, is that Obdi^nce which is duf toG over'^men , aiid 
 then whatever we apprehend the Scnfc of the law to be, wc muft not prerend to obey hu- 
 man Laws in cur Scnfc, in ( ppofition to G .vcrnment ; if we miflake with Authority , and 
 obey the Law ;n thitSenfe which has been allowed in all Reigns, even of the mof^ rightful 
 Kings, wearefaff inConfciencc; Anihc who will advance another Send of the Lsw, 
 upon confidence oHsis own private Judgeiiieot, and verture his Eftate and Fortune, his 
 iibeityand Lifeonit, I think does neither wXcly for himfcU, nor payes that deference he 
 pretends to Government. 
 
 Buthereisan Oath concerned, and danger of Perjury, if having fwovn Allegiance tp 
 K.. TrfiKfS while he is living, wcfwear away our Allegiance froni him to K, iVilUam znH 
 Q. Mary. But I fuDp.*fc legal Oaths mud be expounded by the Laws j and if by the Law 
 of the Land Allegiance to K, J^wejcesfcs, a^bcingoutof Pcffleffion, cur Oath can oblige 
 us no longer ;,^nd if by the Law of the LanJ we owe Allegiance to K, William and Q. Muf^ 
 asin PoffcfTionot rheThronc, thenwcsiiay, and ought, to fwcar Allegiance to them: 
 •Andthis being a point o{ Li5W, mull be decided by the proper judges of it ^ for, if we keep 
 anOa'h wficnthe Lawdoesnotallowit, andrefufeanoach when the Law requires it, wc 
 trangrtfa the Law. And this is not the only legal Oath, wherein Men govern thcaf Ives b^ 
 Judgements of Law, 1 am fure asniuch,3ndl think more plainly againft tlie exprefs K''ords 
 of the Law, thancanbepvetendedinrbeOathof Allegiance 5 1 mean the 0,:thofS/wo»3(, lA 
 which Men fwcar in as genera^ \S^c>i"dsasc5nbrthouohtof,ag^-infl all Bargains orGontrsftsi 
 -cither dirrdL or inJitectly. for the obtaining fucha Living, or Spiritual k^rcFermentj and yet 
 jiake no SciUpkot any fuchContracls.as are not adjudg«°d 5i'^c»>' in Ki^ epminfier- h'all,Vco* 
 they fi*<'m inclu kd in thofe gc-neral \5(7orQs. An^ if wc will not allow it to be a fafe Rule of 
 Confcience to obey Laws, and to take leg^ Oaths, in that Stnfe which Courts of Juflicc, or 
 iearned Ju-'^-es and Lawyers give of them,thi/ we miifl abide by their Judgements when it 
 comes to be tried whs^ther wc have broken or kept thefe Laws 5 Subjids are in an illConditi- 
 on bofh with rrfpeft to their Ccnfcienci^s, their Lives and Eflares. 
 
 Thismigh very well ferve in Anfwer to t4ic Arg jmtm from Law ; for it is acknowlcd^ 
 •<d, thsttherei^-great Authority for onr Allegi:inr^ to a King deJaBo, when the King d& 
 Jure isdifpc ffjled ; Bua have a mind to confider this matter a lirtle farther. 
 
 There is a Book lately Printed, Entituled, Ths C«/e ofAHfgiance to a King in Voffepion ? 
 ThclearnedAi<;;7or has taken a great deal of pains in confidering our Statutes and Hirtorics 
 andhisDefignistoprove, that my L, Ch. }«/?, Ct)o^e was mif^^kcn in his Opinion, That 
 the Starutc of rresfan z<,,Edri. c»i, is to be mdctfinod of a King in Vope^ion oj iheCrewH 
 gnd Kingdom ^ forjftherebeaKingregntt^itin fofeffton, tho^he be Y.cxdtt fado, 5c non 
 idejurc, >«/??*;? Seignior le Koy n-ithiynhe 7 c-f-vierr oj this Statute ;andHjeoiher that hatk 
 F.ight, and is out of PafTeffian, is not ivit'.^n the ^B, It is too long a Book to be pirneular-c 
 'lyanfweredherei bat as I apprehend, his F.tult is, that he does not reafon right upon mat- 
 ters of Fad 5 and feme of his fundamental Miflskesmay be anfweredina fmall compafs; 
 •and r choofe the rather to do it, becaufc they are the very' fame miftakes that impofed^upon 
 me for fome time. . ' ^" 
 
 Our Author think?, Utfouldjtem a very o^d ^tmf^innjonnjtoasky touching the Laws ^' ^ 
 1^4/ 4r€mdf in ttny fctthd Monarch} for tht Dejmf ofiht iUfi^s ^(rfen, Crwa and Vig-
 
 5 6 Vie Cafe of the Allegiance 
 
 ftUy, H^hismeanthytheKingittthefeLaws'i the UwJhI ar^d rightful Kittgo/ that Realm, w 
 r^one that gets into theVofesfion ofthe i hrone, tho' he benn a YighiJulKing.butan nfuiper? 
 Now this (cemsto nie no odd Qacftion at al! j )oi' when the Law ©nly mentions the King, 
 andtheLawmakcrscertainly knew that Kinas without a legal Right do often afcend the 
 Throne ; i^' they had intended to except ail fuchUfurpers, they fhould have faid fo : for i 
 Kingdefa^o, as the Ch. Juft. afferts," is ^eig.narlt Koy , or King j and there is no other 
 King bat he : for King fignifies that Perfon who has the Supreme G.)vc. n.iient in the NatU 
 ©n i A King<fe/«^*? ishe who adualiy has the Government j that is, who is aaually King; 
 .aKingae;«re, asoppofed toa King<ie/«5o, ishewhoof Right (h:>a!d have the Govern- 
 Bient, but has it not j that is, who of Right (liould be King, but is not : and the Statute of 
 Trcafon tells us what is Treafon agair^ft him who isKing, notagainft him whofhouldbc, 
 but is not King. But he proves, this Statute can intend only a King de jure, becaufc it 
 makrsitTreafon to kill the King's ddeft Son, to violate the Queen, or tne Prince's Wife, 
 or the King's cldeft Bauiihtcr, all which, is to fccurc the iuccelTion to the Crown, and 
 thercforecajinot concern anUfurpcr, who has no Right himfelt, and therefore his Heirs 
 iiave no Right to Succefl^on j and wc cannot fuppofcthat the Law Ihould take care to fccurc 
 ihcSucctfTiontothePofterity ofanUfurper. 
 f.8. But this is no Argument to me i for the Law looks upon the Crown as Hereditary, and 
 the Change of the Perfon or Royal Family, docs not make the Crown ceafe to be Heredi- 
 tary j and therefore whoever has Poflcdion of the Crown, has an hereditary Crown, and 
 leaves it to his Heirs, as long as they can keep it -, as is plain from the Example cjf the three 
 Henries, who fuccecded each other. And this is Reafon enough, why the UwOiould 
 make no difference upon this Account between a King defaUo c^ dejure. 
 
 But, my Lord ch. J«i9,Cookc does not found his Glofs upon the fundamental Conftitutton if 
 the Realm, tha'methiribhc (hould have underftood it as well as our Author. But what is 
 thisfundamental Conftitution? Why, The Kegal Authority, nndthe^llegianceofthe 
 UbjeBs, i4 apbrobriated to the lawful and rightful King. But where docs he find this fun- 
 damcntal Conftltution?The fundamental conft.tution, I take te be an hereditary Monarchy ; 
 not that the Monarchy fhould continue always in fuch a Family j for t hat may fail, or may be 
 changed by Conquefts orllfurpations, as has often been, and the Conftitution continue. The 
 nicflthat can befaid is, that when any particular Family, by f he Providence of God, and t'rc 
 Conlcntand Submiffionof the People^ is placed m the Throne, of Right the Crown ought 
 to defcend to the Heir of that Family ; but fuppofc it does not ,mult we pay Allegiance to no 
 other Perfon, tho'DofTeflcd of the Throne? Let him Qiew me that fundamental Gonftitu- 
 lion, for ameer Hereditary Monarchy does not prove it j and according to the Judgment 
 of the bsft Lawyer?, theLawsofthc Land require the contrary, thatwe mud pay our Alle- 
 giance to him who is saually King, not to h.m who ought to hav-c been King, but is not. 
 Andtothmktoconfure this bv pretending the fundamental ConftiiUtion of an Hereditary 
 Monarchy, istotakcth-^tfororantcdwhicboughttohave been proved. 
 
 ThcOucflionisnot, Whether th- Monmhy be Heredirary, that is agreed ; batwhether 
 in an He rditary Monarchy we n uft pay Alleaiancc to no Pilnce who is not legal Heir, tho» 
 pofTened ofthe Throne ; Th's the Liwyers 3cny. and produce Law for rt. and if there be 
 fuch laws, it is certain by Law we may pay Allegiance to a King m Polkfiion, notwith- 
 ftandin^ rh- Tundamen al Conflitution of an Hereditary Monarchy? for the Law, which 
 makesone, allows and commands the other ; and thenit isan Hereditary Monarchy with 
 this rrf^rve ; of paying Allegiance to the King in Fofllflion, when the legal ricir cannot ob- 
 
 Andthisltakctobeayerv wife Conftir«tion, which fecures the King's Right, as far as 
 LawcasdQiti ^tif tbc King ftiould be deprived of his Right ( which ihcfc-xpcricncc of
 
 all Ages proves he may be, does not think fit, that the Govanmcnt {houM (Ink with hirn, 
 and therefore niAkcs provifi. n for the fecuriry of the GoverrT;ent and of Sub)-. 6ts un^^^ the 
 Regnant Priocf, which the Rrafonsand Ncceditics of Government require and juftific, 
 though r her*? had bfcn no Law tor it 
 
 3. He fays, my \ or d Jlo.kesGlofs is contrary to the CanHant praBice and Cultomofthe 
 "Biecilm. For ifTreafon by the CuNm and \'ruBice of the Realm Uj ortij again(i a King in 's^oj- F- ' 
 fejfiou of the Crcnn and Kingdom, then. 
 
 1. rhofeonly wohU be attainted by our Kings and? ayliaments» rt>ho aUed againftaKtng 
 in Tofcfion. 
 
 2, And then certainly a Khg in Vojfe(Jion him'elf, cannot begi'Hty ofTreafon Jotrvhathe 
 .does vhileinVopefionaguinfl a King out ofpo^ffion And yrtwhen a King de jure has 
 
 regained his Throne, the King £/e/*ff{/ and kis A^hcicnrs have been attainted bylailiamtnt 
 for Ofurping the Throne, and oppcfing the right ol the King rfe/wre. l* k * 
 
 Inanfwerto this, lobferve, i. That this does not prove thnt any one ^^ "^^ f 
 Treafon againrta KiBg tie jure, Is not Trcafon when coR,mitted againft a Kmgtfe 
 JaBo', nowihatis enough to prove, that Allegiance is by Law due to 2i Kw%deJtCtOy it 
 Treafon iv.ay be committed againft him : for no Trcafon can be ccmir.itttd, where no 
 Allegiance is due. . 
 
 Thisisconfcflcdj ihatalKuch Afts, as arc Treafan againft a TiTino de jure, are Trealon 
 when committed ;5gaiaft a Xing tfe^irffo, but nor, fay they, becaufe Allegiance is ^"^J^° 
 bira, but becaufe they are againft the Order of Government, and therefore arc Trealon b]f 
 theprtfumed confentoftheXing</ey«re, lanfwer. 
 
 That fuch Acls arc againft the Order of Government, and very deftruftivc to it, is the on- 
 ly Rcafon why they are made Trcafon by Law, andthisisasgooda Reafon, why the Law 
 (hould make them Treafon againft a Xing </e/r^o, asagainfta King <fe Jwye j for -they arc 
 equally againft the Order of Government, and dcftrultiyeto it, whoever be Xing* a"* 
 that is the only Rcafon why they are masle Treafon at all 
 
 Theprefumed Confcnt of the King dejure is a very pretty notion, and (ervcsa great many 
 good turns J it makes Laws, and it makes Treafon, and gives Authority to the inauthori- 
 tativc AdsofaXing </e/43o; that is to fay (or they fay nothing) that the prefumed 
 Confent of a King (fe;«re, invefts the King ^f/a^o with his Authority j for ithehaveno 
 Authority of his own, unlefsthcprefumcd Conftntof the King </ry«re give him Authority, 
 it cannot make any treafonable Ad done againft him to be Trcafon ,* for it cannot alter the 
 nature of things, nor make me guilty of Treafon againft any Perfonj to whc ml owe no 
 no Duty and Allegiance. And if the prefumed Confent of the King </e;ttre invcfts the King 
 lie/u^o with his Authority, itmuft transfer the Allegiance of Subjeds too 5 and then Sub- 
 jeds areas fafe in Confcience, asifthcKit^g dejure were ©n the Throne 5 forit feems 
 there is his Aurhority and Confent, though not his Perfon. 
 
 ;But this is all meer trifling ; the King 'rfr/4^0 has Authority, or none of his Afts ofGo- 
 ▼crnment can havcany ; for that which isdone byaPerfon, who has no Authotitycaa 
 bavenone: Whence then has hethis Authoriry, fincc hehasno legal Right to the Throne> 
 Not from the prefumed Confeat of the King (f*;«rf, which is great non-tenfe to fuppofcl 
 "but from the Pofll'ftion of the Throne, to which the Law it felf, aswcllasthc Principlesof 
 Reafon and Religion, have annexed the Aufhority of Govcinmrnr. 
 
 2, As for the Attainders of Kings </e >S« and their Adherents in Parliament, that does 
 not prove that Subjcas cannot be guilty of Treafon againft a King in Pcflefllon. nor thac 
 the Statute of Treafon does not relate toaKing inPoflcftion: for the Statute o^ Treafon 
 does not relate to the difpures of Princes, buttothc Order of Govcmircnr,- and therefore 
 mayrclatctoaKinginpoiT^ffion^^ti^ugliJ^^g binafclf, if he be an Ulurpcr, when
 
 n^ay be attainted of Treafon for his UfLrnatfnn ' ' '^^' "^''^ ^ '^""^'^'^ ^^^°r^> 
 
 And thefethinss areas con fjftenf asfrjc! i 
 volutions happen, a^dycttodifcoura^a iXlm/'^^ '^ ^^'«" f^<^h re- 
 
 And yet th^ rruth is, there is no Am m '^1 ^>}^^rpmous. 
 
 55a Comperitionforthc Crown^hcreTrd'^utt bnrri^"^^^''; ^^^ ^^^"^^"' ^f'^^^- 
 cr^.y.re, will attaint bis Rfval and a his Ad^^^^^^^^^ ^''^^^^'"? ^^^^^« 
 
 snd He^,;;). VK between i^/c/,.,^ Ill, 3„'/r^^^ Thusitwas betv^een Edward iV, 
 
 this is no proof, what the Lav^ of the Land is h, J I n "l "^^^ "^"^ another, and 
 
 waysfavouredtheKinginPo/Tefllon. ' "' improves, that Pailiam ents have alw 
 
 ^o'/thl^^^Ta:^^^^^ whether de jureor 
 
 Cromun?arUament 39. H. 6, andft las f-XtlH "^^^ Mi» h^ claim to tht 
 
 But 1 would fain know what kind of Tf and allowed by them, 
 
 none upon Earth, appeals in fuch Cpfcscarhrm,?''''' ^ ^^'^'''"'"'' ^^ whom, or to 
 a little improvement o( the Ar^umenwonuLTfo-^^^^^ ^'"'"^ ^« ^^e Crown? 
 
 ciV.'e(}mm!ler.Hall to receivea Comnfalt .nH ^ f ^ T'''^"" ' ^^^' ^"^ «f ^'^^ Courts 
 
 If hehad n„d, that the Law had a &' s! ' a^ ^"^''J^f a Caufeag.inft the King. 
 King in Po(T,lIIon, this had proved 1 ^p.tfrh'.f^ '" ^^'^V^' '^' ^'"^ ^' ^'^^ ^g^^'"^^^^ 
 inPofieOIon ; but there is m> fuch L vv^s h^^^^ againllaKing 
 
 the King, andrhit, %s my Lord Co I T. ^e 1^^ Treafon to fight againS 
 
 ferve forth, defence oL,,l^Z^^^^^^^^ without making arty res 
 
 it feems the Wd'dam of the Nat^Ts „ot ! ^^^'"^' L'''' ^^^" ^"^ ^^ ^^^^^'^^ " ^ Fo^ 
 Wars when fuch a Rcvolurbn "an e s"'^^^ L n3^^'^'. "^'^^ \ "^^^ ^" ''^^'^^ ^^'^^'^ 
 
 An appeal to Parliament is a nmn^r v^ J ! . ^''y '"^ ""^'^"'^ Submidlon. 
 when tilere is a Compct rbn "bu Thou.Vf t'^?. "^^ Crown belong., 
 
 Wars, Ver ihcneceflity of Government ?i^ °^^^^^^^« Civil 
 
 fideofthcKin^inPoir.ffion and ^^ n ,-1. a i^' Law fhould a!way,be on the 
 
 rc^f^ds u:o»ldlo,'>i_t,poH theKin^in^oir.ir,,n ^ °',^ '.""''; ^f^"Z ^^ ^'Mon, then the Lavj in other 
 
 eurLa^ allows them the name Of Kings \uV/™wf^^^^^ But he has anfwcred this hinifelf, rhst 
 tbatis, cur-Laws do not allowthoferfbeTeL . f^f^v. 'k ^^'"^^^-T ^^a. 
 
 to be Kin|S3se;c^rcilingtheReg..lPowe / lid ;^^^^^ ™^- but yer alIo.v them 
 
 rpe-'knopfenfe? And yet heilvouldreoi^raberthat e7 rv ? ha/e more uniefs our La«-sfIaouI4 
 yi. Parli.maht.sthe ^^«->. had from fXT.ihe^ ^'^^^' ^^^« hard words from H. 
 
 2. Heobfcrves, thatr//^Z,^iurfof, ;,of/,^t„._;, /""7^^^- ^ ^ 
 
 ,.. ^«^;^r;,.K, <» valid and aHthorUative in ttZ?^"f^ ^ofetPon , if 
 
 Kings; andyethehimfelfconfefles,thtS^^^^ 
 
 Iknownothowtheir A£h louldl^ . ^dt't^^^^ V^^5'V'^"g^ ^^^^ no Authority, 
 
 i^entgivcsAutJioritytoruchKingstnd he ^Aft!;i^^^^^^^^^ 
 thisandthcprelumedConrenrjisbeenSdfreTake"dv^ ^nd^that had bcco Scnfej but 
 
 anUvertoitisvcrvLame, that fomeof the^TAa. oHr'. f' ^ ^^ "e J^ood Laws mil; and h,s 
 
 l^eafons, th^i the 'Jnivcrflcies and orher ReliSous FoJnrf/ri?^^^ rcrthefnne 
 
 f es Reigns, though confirmed by Aft of P fi °mem • Ih h^^^^^^^^ *^ ^'" i" ^'^ ^^^"»^ ^'i"- 
 
 ^ - • Xoiveis:
 
 fumed 
 
 7)ue to%overetgnTowers, kt, 3 9 
 
 powers: Eiitwhensll rublickAasmadeby Tarlkments called by Kin^s ^. M. *»;' fC^J'-'d ^nd 
 ownMf, rcood Laws without cnv new Confiriraion, that is prootenouch that they tncugiu the Au- 
 thority fufficienr, .vherebv they were made, though the King h3c not a Legal I^.'S^'^- . 
 
 Butvetlctmeadd, that had it teen the conft..nt and uriveiUlnaaicc lor the ILix^gtdejt'.rc. ^Lzn 
 thcrretum-d to their Crowns, to conhrm all the judiciol Atis, Grants, Statutes, ir^. ot he K r.^s 
 dehci., thishad been evidence enough, that the Necefimes of Government ^^^1^*^^ ' /[^^^;^^^jl^. 
 A£ts of Kings def..^o fiiould be valid ; for thu is the only Reafon why they are confirmco by a .egal 
 Auti^criry; becaufeitisneccfiliry they ftcuid be valid, and yet convenient l^i the difcouragemen 
 offuchUluipat.ons, that they fkoidd not be thought valid ,,vMthout a Irgal Confiimatiori, but what 
 the necefluyof Government makes valid, isvalidin it leli wuhoutany new Confiimation ; though 
 theRcafonscf^atcm-.vmakeruchaContirmationuIetul. _ . u- r »„«»,,<: m<, 
 
 Tlic next thing he underrakes to anfv^er is B.-ggot^s Cafe, conceihing the validity of hjs Tatent of Na- 
 turalization granted by H. VL who wss cnlv King de facio ; though it were net confirmed by the Statute 
 1 EdAV. This he branches out into leverp'l Particulars, and fays a great ded about it, but nothing; 
 w: HealwaystakesSanftuarym his old Salvoes of the ncccffivy otthe Goverriment, andthepte- 
 med Conlcntolihe King ^^;«rr, which hive been fufficiently ccnfidercd already 
 Allthatlfhall conclude from this cafe rwhich Imuft taUeas he has reprGfentedit) isthis; thatthc 
 neccnityof Government (for both the judges and Council underftood things better than to urge ths 
 prcftimedconftnr of tht I\>r,g dejHre.) gives Authority to all thofe Ads of a King deJaUc, which are lot 
 the Adm.iniftration of Turticc, and belong to Sovereign Towers; and then by the fame rcalon, they 
 muft juftifieSnbjeasin paying Allesisnce to fuch Kings; for this is neceilary to Gciiernmenr. Cur 
 Author will dlow this in 2llc:,re-s which aic not agunlt the Intereftot the dilpofielled frmce; but 
 ihisisto allow nothing, forthe verypbfieffion ot the Throne, and every Aft of Authority rhe King 
 ae^<:?«does, isagainltthe Intereft of the King ^ei«>c •• Buthe fcemsallaiong tomiltakc 0//r/ »mi 
 GrJinrs, to thsDiminu:ionot:heCro-wn r*bich they '.ould not a'low toftand good , when rhc K^ng^« 
 j^r^ returned) foiall Adsagainfl the PerlOHal Right and Inteieft of theKmc; ^f ;«« ■ But tne D:- 
 mir.HnivQfthiQnwn, zxidthe T^^bt if theltrjon^ arc very diSetent thaigs, ashemlleah!y lee, when 
 he ccnfidersit again. . . , . ^ , „. . n rr i 
 
 •• As for the Stature! I H. 7- which indemnifies Subjeasm FigQtirgfor the King inpsflellion,- he p, ,<y^ 
 difputes very hrgely about it, butlcanatprtfent makeonly lomefaort Remarks on w.:i2t hcl.ys. 
 
 1. Heobfetves, thatitisonly faid inthePieimble, not cn^Med tn the Lody ofiaeSrarur, tlmttbc 
 S:d}tclsf»nUbe olli<Lcd t<* p. y ^.Ugu:me it the K»>.j? for the t;mehttng ; but whether a rreamble DC Law 
 orno. iris an Authoritative Dechmion of the Lav/, and that isa lufficicnt RuhforSubjeftsj and u 
 '2jHi-3. concc'rnsKingsinroflcIlior, itisenaciedthcre. 
 
 2. Hcv.iil not dlow this Fte.-mble to be a drefi and pofitive DeclaratieK of the Law; bccaufe the p, 17, 
 iC^n9 0C\\j iayf, th^ithecall: to remcmhance his Subjects duty of -_4l'e^i-incc, 5cc But ittheKmg and 
 J>ath-imcntdeclar(?, that they rcn.cniber , this is the duty of Al egiance. does not th-t dechrc their 
 Opinion, that it is a duty s'seHectujliy ascan be done in any other torni of words 3 nay IbrrewJiat 
 more, forwhatthey remember, they cechtewis fabeioic, '„nd not made lonrw, nieerljf by their 
 Declaration; and whatthe i'arliamentluppofesaud takesforgtirtcd, ittr.ore efftwluilly declares. 
 
 Sdly. He fays, -whc-.r it Luddovaitnthe I>re.%mble^ is txprify falfe that it t< not reafonMc^ hut A- p. Zf » 
 
 guinfl- &il LavJSy K^enfon^ andgoodCnyieme, that ihe Subjects going-jjith their Sovtrtt^i Lerdto Wars^ 
 ^■■:y thifig/koyJd lofe or forfeit ftr detnviije.r rme Dtty andService of ^iUcgiance -^ Nowif thisbe falfe, 
 1 know not what can be true; is the contrary to it true? thatit is agreeable »»/.4w , 7{eafon y a-id good 
 €onfdenct, that Subjefts ftiould lol.t ot forft^it any thing for Fighting tor their King ? But th:s is mefi.nt 
 -0f Fight m: for a-fiVfurper agjiinjt their Uvj ft*'- I\:ng. And yet here is not one wcrd cf VJurper, or/^t:.'- 
 fulK^ngy hwioai Sovereign Lordy whom the Lnv requires US to own for our i-cvereign ; audit isa- 
 gsinftLaw, Reafon, and good Confcience, rha-Subje^s Ihould fuffctfor Fighting for any Frincc, 
 .Whatever ijisTitle be, wiiom the Law ocvusfei Sovereign atihattime: Th?r Kings and Parliaments 
 9S he urges, have attainted Subjcftsupon Inch accounts, does net prove, thit it was iiot againft Lavr 
 and F.cafo'n and good Confcience 10 uo lb; aivd it leems H- 71 who had done this himfelr wasnovv 
 convinced of it, and took cate to provide it- Aipuldbe fono more. lam (i;re my Lord BJconf-.ycs. 
 this Law was rather ;»? r/;.rs legal ; and thcretcie owned the Reafon and good Confcience of ;», though 
 he demurred aboutthe legality. 
 
 But our Author will be fo liberal, asto grant, that all this xu^yf r/;^ Viody of the Statmre And a direH P- 2>» 
 2,jxy;then!tisplain, thit Sub J5£ts might by Law Fight for rheKing in poficflion. andiheir Allegi- 
 sncc would obligcthemtoit. No, hefays, it vjili remain to l/e itonjidertd^ vjhethcr the 6tatvAc t\:i}lt 
 iotktd upon :ii -valid and il/ligator} ; an 1 he thinks it is not. 
 
 I. Bectufe it vj-xs )}jadcLj anVfnrper, andby ^nlJiiitptisVixViirv.tut. This is a bold fircketccall 
 Hf" VILanUlurper, whohadfomany.TitJcs, andnoTitle fet up againft him; end to quef ion the 
 AuihOiityof alaxlumcntwllsSbythcwiiiof aKipginpoffefuon, an^i^ jl'-ny the v^lintyef Ac'^sot
 
 p. 3: 
 
 So that 1 will not dJrn.,tA«t;»j,K; u.... ' ^ o^ncc 
 
 
 jnirtaken in th.s marrer, bccaufe after .11 this was done L r^'^i"^"* , ^'°^^ ^ '-"^ ^pt'to thfnk 
 
 made by H.. VIII. andlilcOathof All,,, bt'c' .ho' In 4i M """?• . ■*' '"' "'^Aftsof !uc„ 
 1 m «d bri;","'""=' """""""-oft JlJblVtome Sttti'r?'"/ ^':f'' "'=''=''i''ou,re 
 
 fc, ves .»d the World abou, Law, if nothmg fcU paf forTTnnrf °t """■." ""^ '''= '''^J- '""We th 
 If ou. Author cretullv confider wha, I have afre dv di&^"",', '"^'"^ ''"^ydon'tlike. 
 
 bea votdLswwKhrerpeatothe Matter, though the ^t^^^^^^^ J'oflbflior 
 
 Torncnherd:velh the LawfHlI^ingofhuT(,JtotLcr^^^^^^^ ^"^ '"°*^'* good. '- 
 
 /./:.«: Now a very feort atife will ferve f or thi's For "^ '^^ '" ''^''' ""^ '^*"*^^^ i.K.«^.» r 
 
 u^uh a Regal Authority; nothe. who has Sto doit hnri^^'^'V'*'''!^^^"^ '^'^ Govcmmi 
 may r^am the Ttae of King, buthehasnothtge/re ' ' ^'^' ^'°™^'' ^'^^''' f^haPriD 
 
 the Law may determine how far L RixCftall^xtend ^n/i"? "'^ ^'8^' ^"^ by Law, and th 
 fenr, and amhority of the Eftate5 of the Realm TconfideHn. h '' ^^^ ^i"*'5^^ ^y ^^e ai.ice, co 
 Pimce who hjs no Legal Rieh^ p«<; Port^^^ ( coniidering how often fuch cafes haooen rhVi 
 -ranees occ.fion,and\p^^^^^^^^ 
 
 Jiould think fit, forthcfecuruy oftheeomnmentVnd ^1?! V ^ ■°' '}'' *^'"8 '" 'offe^^o. 
 Sub;eas to the rcfi.-ffion of the Throne whfrJn?^ • ^^ ^'<^^ '"^^' '« bind the AJleeiaDce( 
 tight be bounded -ad limited by Lr.7xwfym^^ ^"'^ ^^^'^ *hy may nltlTeg 
 
 the beftproviGon 'hey can to prefer.e the Gove^ZTr^c '^^'T^ Authority of the Nition mal 
 
 the Concienccs of sibjeas,iS jr rerolSons a™"o rL^^^^^^^ 
 
 Governraen-s Will not alwayes piocttd in It^nUrlrr},^ can prevent? Sit^cehumar 
 
 from the Conlhtution, butneccfl°rymfuchfu 'du^^^^^^^ ''l^'ch areexcepTio 
 
 ^ ThusIhavefairlyreprerentedSmy thoighS^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 ioi 
 
 fatij 

 
 ^:mimBm of ciuwiBBiiii 
 
 AT 
 
 LOS AXIGKLIS 
 
 LIBRARY
 
 ^S?^'-