the cause; that fince men had nothing else left them, they might in flavery have fuch undeniable proofs of its neceffity, that their confciences might be convinced, and oblige them to fubmit peaceably to that abfolute dominion, which their governors had a right to exercise over them. Without this, what good could our author do, or pretend to do, by erecting fuch an unlimited power, but flatter the natural vanity and ambition of men, too apt of itself to grow and encrease with the poffeffion of any power? and by perfuading thofe, who, by the confent of their fellowmen, are advanced to great, but limited, degrees of it, that by that part which is given them, they have a right to all, that was not fo; and therefore may do what they pleafe, because they have authority to do more than others, and fo tempt them to do what is neither for their own, nor the good of thofe under their care; whereby great mischiefs cannot but follow.

§. 11. The fovereignty of Adam, being that on which, as a fure bafis, our author builds his mighty abfolute monarchy, I expected, that in his Patriarcha, this his main fuppofition would have been proved, and established with all that evidence of arguments, that fuch a fundamental tenet required; and that this, on which the great ftrefs of the bufinefs depends, would have been made out with reafons fufficient to justify the confidence

with

with which it was affumed. But in all that treatise, I could find very little tending that way; the thing is there fo taken for granted, without proof, that I could scarce believe myfelf, when, upon attentive reading that treatife, I found there fo mighty a ftructure raifed the bare fuppofition of this upon foundation for it is fcarce credible, that in a difcourfe, where he pretends to confute the erroneous principle of man's natural freedom, he fhould do it by a bare fuppofition of Adam's authority, without offering any proof for that authority. Indeed he confidently fays, that Adam had royal authority, p. 12, and 13. Abfolute lordship and dominion of life and death, p. 13. An univerfal monarchy, p. 33. Abfolute power of life and death, p. 35. He is very frequent in fuch affertions; but, what is ftrange, in all his whole Patriarcha I find not one pretence of a reafon to establish this his great foundation of government; not any thing that looks like an argument, but there words: To confirm this natural right of regal power, we find in the Decalogue, that the law which enjoyns obedience to kings, is delivered in the terms, Honour thy father, as if all power were originally in the father. And why may I not add as well, that in the Decalogue, the law that enjoyns obedience to queens, is delivered in the terms of Honour thy mother, as if all power were originally in the mother? The

argument,

argument, as Sir Robert puts it, will hold as well for one as the other: but of this, more in its due place.

§. 12. All that I take notice of here, is, that this is all our author fays in this firft, or any of the following chapters, to prove the abfolute power of Adam, which is his great principle and yet, as if he had there fettled it upon fure demonftration, he begins his fecond chapter with these words, By conferring thefe proofs and reafons, drawn from the authority of the fcripture. Where those proofs and reafons for Adam's fovereignty are, bating that of Honour thy father, above mentioned, I confefs, I cannot find; unless what he fays, p. 11. In these words we have an evident confeffion, viz. of Bellarmine, that creation made man prince of his pofterity, must be taken for proofs and reafons drawn from fcripture, or for any fort of proof at all: though from thence by a new way of inference, in the words immediately following, he concludes, the royal authority of Adam fufficiently fettled in him.

§. 13. If he has in that chapter, or any where in the whole treatife, given any other proofs of Adam's royal authority, other than by often repeating it, which, among fome men, goes for argument, I defire any body for him to fhew me the place and page, that I may be convinced of my miftake, and acknowledge my overfight. If no fuch argu

ments

ments are to be found, I beseech thofe men, who have fo much cried up this book, to confider, whether they do not give the world cause to suspect, that it is not the force of reafon and argument, that makes them for abfolute monarchy, but fome other by intereft, and therefore are refolved to applaud any author, that writes in favour of this doctrine, whether he support it with reason or no. But I hope they do not expect, that rational and indifferent men fhould be brought over to their opinion, because this their great doctor of it, in a difcourfe made on purpose, to fet up the abfolute monarchical power of Adam, in oppofition to the natural freedom of mankind, has said so little to prove it, from whence it is rather naturally to be concluded, that there is little to be faid.

§. 14. But that I might omit no care to inform myself in our author's full fenfe, I confulted his Obfervations on Ariftotle, Hobbes, &c. to fee whether in difputing with others he made use of any arguments for this his darling tenet of Adam's Sovereignty; fince in his treatise of the Natural Power of Kings, he hath been so sparing of them. In his Obfervations on Mr. Hobbes's Leviathan, I think he has put, in fhort, all those arguments for it together, which in his writings I find him any where to make ufe of his words are thefe: If God created only Adam, and of a piece of him made the woman, and if by gene

ration from them two, as parts of them, all mankind be propagated: if alfo God gave to Adam not only the dominion over the woman and the children that should iffue from them, but also over all the earth to fubdue it, and over all the creatures on it, fo that as long as Adam lived, no man could claim or enjoy any thing but by donation, affignation or permiffion from him, I wonder, &c. Obfervations, 165. Here we have the fum of all his arguments, for Adam's fovereignty, and against natural freedom, which I find up and down in his other treatifes; and they are these following; God's creation of Adam, the dominion he gave him over Eve, and the dominion he had as father over his children: all which I fhall particularly confider.

CHA P. III.

Of Adam's Title to Sovereignty by Creation.

§. 15.

Obfervations on Aristotle's politics, IR Robert, in his preface to his tells us, A natural freedom of mankind cannot be fuppofed without the denial of the creation of Adam: but how Adam's being created, which was nothing but his receiving a being immediately from omnipotence and the hand of God, gave Adam a fovereignty over any thing, I cannot fee, nor confequently underftand, how a fuppofition of natural freedom is

a