have the preference in fucceffion, if he has the fame title the first lawful prince had: and in dominion that has its foundation only in the positive appointment of God himself, Benjamin, the youngest, must have the inheritance of the crown, if God fo direct, as well as one of that tribe had the firft poffeffion.

§. 96. If paternal right, the act of begetting, give a man rule and dominion, inheritance or primogeniture can give no title: for he that cannot fucceed to his father's title, which was begetting, cannot fucceed to that power over his brethren, which his father had by paternal right over them. But of this I fhall have occafion to fay more in another place. This is plain in the mean time, that any government, whether fuppofed to be at first founded in paternal right, confent of the people, or the pofitive appointment of God himself, which can fuperfede either of the other, and fo begin a new government upon a new foundation; I fay, any government began upon either of these, can by right of fucceffion come to those only, who have the title of him they fucceed to: power founded on contract can defcend only to him, who has right by that contract power founded on begetting, he only can have that begets; and power founded on the pofitive grant or donation of God, he only can have by right of fucceffion, to whom that grant directs it.

§. 97.

§. 97. From what I have said, I think this is clear that a right to the use of the creatures, being founded originally in the right a man has to fubfift and enjoy the conveniencies of life; and the natural right children have to inherit the goods of their parents, being founded in the right they have to the fame fubfiftence and commodities of life, out of the ftock of their parents, who are therefore taught by natural love and tenderness to provide for them, as a part of themselves; and all this being only for the good of the proprietor, or heir; it can be no reafon for children's inheriting of rule and dominion, which has another original and a different end. Nor can primogeniture have any pretence to a right of folely inheriting either property or power, as we fhall, in its due place, fee more fully. It is enough to have fhewed here, that Adam's property, or private dominion, could not convey any fovereignty or rule to his heir, who not having a right to inherit all his father's poffeffions, could not thereby come to have any fovereignty over his brethren: and therefore, if any fovereignty on account of his property had been vefted in Adam, which in truth there was not, yet it would have died with him.

§. 98. As Adam's fovereignty, if, by virtue of being proprietor of the world, he had any authority over men, could not have been inherited by any of his children over the reft, because they had the fame title to divide the inheritance, and every one had a right to a I

portion

portion of his father's poffeffions; fo neither could Adam's fovereignty by right of fatherhood, if any fuch he had, defcend to any one of his children: for it being, in our author's account, a right acquired by begetting to rule over thofe he had begotten, it was not a power poffible to be inherited, becaufe the right being confequent to, and built on, an act perfectly perfonal, made that power fo too, and impoffible to be inherited for paternal power, being a natural right rifing only from the relation of father and fon, is as impoffible to be inherited as the relation itfelf; and a man may pretend as well to inherit the conjugal power the husband, whofe heir he is, had over his wife, as he can to inherit the paternal power of a father over his children: for the power of the husband being founded on contract, and the power of the father on begetting, he may as well inherit the power obtained by the conjugal contract, which was only perfonal, as he may the power obtained by begetting, which could reach no farther than the perfon of the begetter, unlefs begetting can be a title to power in him that does not beget.

§. 99. Which makes it a reasonable question to afk, whether Adam, dying before Eve, his heir, (fuppofe Cain or Seth) fhould have by right of inheriting Adam's fatherhood, fovereign power over Eve his mother: for Adam's fatherbood being nothing but a right he had to govern his children, because he begot them, he that

inherits

inherits Adam's fatherhood, inherits nothing, even in our author's fenfe, but the right Adam had to govern his children, because he begot them: fo that the monarchy of the heir would not have taken in Eve; or if it did, it being nothing but the fatherhood of Adam defcended by inheritance, the heir must have right to govern Eve, because Adam begot her; for fatherhood is nothing else.

§. 100. Perhaps it will be faid with our author, that a man can alien his power over his child; and what may be transferred by compact, may be poffeffed by inheritance. I answer, a father cannot alien the power he has over his child: he may perhaps to fome degrees forfeit it, but cannot transfer it; and

if any other man acquire it, it is not by the father's grant, but by fome act of his own. For example, a father, unnaturally careless of his child, fells or gives him to another man; and he again expofes him; a third man finding him, breeds up, cherishes, and provides for him as his own: I think in this cafe, no body will doubt, but that the greateft part of filial duty and subjection was here owing, and to be paid to this fofter-father; and if any thing could be demanded from the child, by either of the other, it could be only due to his natural father, who perhaps might have forfeited his right to much of that duty comprehended in the command, Honour your parents, but could transfer none of it to another. He that purchased, and I 2 neglected

neglected the child, got by his purchase and grant of the father, no title to duty or honour from the child; but only he acquired it, who by his own authority, performing the office and care of a father, to the forlorn and perishing infant, made himself, by paternal care, a title to proportionable degrees of paternal power. This will be more easily admitted upon confideration of the nature of paternal power, for which I refer my reader to the fecond book.

§. 101. To return to the argument in hand; this is evident, That paternal power arifing only from begetting, for in that our author places it alone, can neither be tranfferred nor inherited: and he that does not beget, can no more have paternal power, which arifes from thence, than he can have a right to any thing, who performs not the condition, to which only it is annexed. If one should ask, by what law has a father power over his children? it will be anfwered, no doubt, by the law of nature, which gives fuch a power over them, to him that begets them. If one should ask likewife, by what law does our author's heir come by a right to inherit? I think it would be answered, by the law of nature too : for I find not that our author brings one word of fcripture to prove the right of fuch an heir he speaks of. Why then the law of nature gives fathers paternal power over their children, because they did beget them; and

the