be hard to find, from that time downwards, any one who exercifed it as an inheritance defcending to him from the patriarchs Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob. I imagined monarchical government would have ferved his turn in the hands of Pharaoh, or any body. But one cannot eafily discover in all places what his difcourfe tends to, as particularly in this place it is not obvious to guess what he drives at, when he fays, the exercife of fupreme patriarchal jurifdiction in Egypt, or how this ferves to make out the defcent of Adam's lordship to the patriarchs, or any body elfe.

§. 153. For I thought he had been giving us out of fcripture, proofs and examples of monarchical government, founded on paternal authority, defcending from Adam; and not an history of the Jews amongst whom yet we find no kings, till many years after they were a people: and when kings were their rulers, there is not the leaft mention or room for a pretence that they were heirs to Adam, or kings by paternal authority. Lexpected, talking fo much as he does of fcripture, that he would have produced thence a series of monarchs, whofe titles were clear to Adam's fatherhood, and who, as heirs to him, owned and exercised paternal jurif diction over their fubjects, and that this was the true patriarchical government; whereas he neither proves, that the patriarchs were kings; nor that either kings or patriarchs N

were

were heirs to Adam, or fo much as pretended to it and one may as well prove, that the patriarchs were all abfolute monarchs; that the power both of patriarchs and kings was only paternal; and that this power defcended to them from Adam: I fay all thefe propofitions may be as well proved by a confufed account of a multitude of little kings in the WeftIndies, out of Ferdinando Soto, or any of our late hiftories of the Northern America, or by our author's 70 kings of Greece, out of Ho→ mer, as by any thing he brings out of fcripture, in that multitude of kings he has. reckoned up.

S. 154. And methinks he fhould have fet Homer and his wars of Troy alone, fince his great zeal to truth or monarchy carried him to fuch a pitch of tranfport against philofophers and poets, that he tells us in his preface, that there are too many in thefe days, who pleafe themfelves in running after the opinions of philofophers and poets, to find out fuch an original of government, as might promise them Jome title to liberty, to the great Scandal of Christianity, and bringing in of atheism. And yet these heathens, philofopher Ariftotle, and poet Homer, are not rejected by our zealous Chriftian politician, whenever they offer any thing that seems to ferve his turn; whether to the great fcandal of Chriftianity and bringing in of atheism, let him look. This I cannot but observe, in authors who it is vifible write

not

ro

(not for truth, how ready zeal for intereft and party is to entitle Chriftianity to their de figns, and to charge atheism on those who will not without examining fubmit to their doctrines, and blindly fwallow their nonfenfe.marsha

2

1

But to return to his fcripture hiftory, our author farther tells us, p. 18. that after the return of the Ifraelites out of bondage, God, out of a special care of them, chofe Mofes and Joshua fucceffively to govern as princes in the place and flead of the fupreme fathers. If it be true, that they returned out of bondage, it must be into a state of freedom, and muft imply, that both before and after this bondage they were free, unless our author will fay, that changing of masters is returning out of bondage; or that a flave returns out of bondage, when he is removed from one gally to anoother. If then they returned out of bondage, it is plain that in those days, whatever our author in his preface fays to the contrary, there were difference between a son, a fubject, and a flave; and that neither the patriarchs before, nor their rulers after this Egyptian bondage, numbered their fons or fubjects among ft their poffeffions, and difpofed of them with as abfolute a dominion, as they did their other goods.v

§. 155. This is evident in Jacob, to whom Reuben offered his two fons as pledges; and Judah was at last furety for Benjamin's safe

N 2

return

7

3

return out of Egypt which all had been vain, fuperfluous, and but a fort of mockery, if Jacob had had the fame power over every one of his family, as he had over his ox or his afs, as an owner over his fubftance; and the offers that Reuben or Judah made had been fuch a fecurity for returning of Benja min, as if a man fhould take two lambs out of his lord's flock, and offer one as fecurity, that he will fafely reftore the other. grooto S. 156. When they were out of this bondage, what then? God out of a special care of them, the Ifraelites. It is well that once in his book he will allow God to have any care of the people; for in other places he speaks of mankind, as if God had no care of any part of them, but only of their monarchs, and that the rest of the people, the focieties of men, were made as fo many herds of cattle, only for the service, ufe, and pleasure of their princes.

tom

§. 157. Chofe Mofes and Jofhua fucceffively govern as princes; a fhrewd argument our author has found out to prove God's care of the fatherly authority, and Adam's heirs, that here, as an expreffion of his care of his own people, he chooses thofe for princes over them, that had not the leaft pretence to either. The perfons chofen were, Mofes of the tribe. of Levi, and Joshua of the tribe of Ephraim, neither of which had any title of fatherhood. But fays our author, they were in the place

and

and stead of the fupreme fathers. If God had any where as plainly declared his choice of such fathers to be rulers, as he did of Mofes and Joshua, we might believe Mofes and fofbua were in their place and Read: but that being the question in debate, till that be better proved, Mofes being chofen by God to be ruler of his people, will no more prove that government belonged to Adam's heir, or to the fatherhood, than God's choofing Aaron of the tribe of Levi to be. prieft, will prove that the priesthood belonged to Adam's heir, or the prime fathers; fince God would choose Aaron to be priest, and Mofes ruler in Ifrael, though neither of those offices were fettled on Adam's heir, or the fatherhood.

158. Our author goes on, and after them likewife for a time be raised up judges, to defend bis people in time of peril, p. 18. This proves fatherly authority to be the original of go vernment, and that it defcended from Adam to his heirs, juft as well as what went before: only here our author feems to confess, that thefe judges, who were all the governors they then had, were only men of valour, whom they made their generals to defend: them in time of peril; and cannot God raife up fuch men, unless fatherhood have a title to government ?

But fays our author, when God gave the If raelites kings, he re-established the ancient and

N 3

prime

&