very principles of nature in him. But because it is the vulgar folly of men to defert their own reafon, and fhutting their eyes to think they fee best with other men's, I fhall fhow by fuch examples as ought to have most weight with us, what hath been done in this cafe hereto fore. The Greeks and Romans, as their prime authors witness, held it not only lawful, but a glorious and heroic deed, rewarded publicly with ftatues and garlands, to kill an infamous tyrant at any time without trial: and but reason, that he, who trod down all law, fhould not be vouchfafed the benefit of law. Infomuch that Seneca the tragedian brings in Hercules, the grand fuppreffor of tyrants, thus speaking; Victima haud ulla amplior Poteft, magifque opima mactari Jovi - There can be flain No facrifice to God more acceptable But of these I name no more, left it be objected they were Heathen; and come to produce another fort of men, that had the knowledge of true religion. Among the Jews this cuftom of tyrant-killing was not unufual. First Ehud, a man whom God had raised to deliver Ifrael from Eglon king of Moab, who had conquered and ruled over them eighteen years, being fent to him as an ambaffador with a prefent, flew him in his own houfe. But he was a foreign prince, an enemy, and Ehud befides had special warrant from God. To the firft I answer, it imports not whether foreign or native: for no prince fo native but profeffes to hold by law; which when he himself overturns, breaking all the covenants and oaths that gave him title to his dignity, and were the bond and alliance between him and his people, what differs he from an outlandish king, or from an enemy? For look how much right the king of Spain hath to govern us at all, fo much right hath the king of England to govern us tyrannically. If he, though not bound to us by any league, coming from Spain in perfon to fubdue us, or to deftroy us, us, might lawfully by the people of England either be flain in fight, or put to death in captivity, what háth a native king to plead, bound by so many covenants, benefits, and honours, to the welfare of his people; why he through the contempt of all laws and parliaments, the only tie of our obedience to him, for his own will's fake, and a boafted prerogative unaccountable,after feven years warring and deftroying of his best fubjects, overcome, and yielded prifoner, fhould think to fcape unquestionable, as a thing divine, in refpect of whom fo many thoufand Christians deftroyed fhould lie unaccounted for, polluting with their flaughtered carcafles all the land over, and crying for vengeance againft the living that should have righted them? Who knows not that there is a mutual bond of amity and brotherhood between man and man over all the world, neither is it the English fea that can fever us from that duty and relation: a straiter bond yet there is between fellow-fubjects, neighbours, and friends. But when any of these do one to another so as hoftility could do no worfe, what doth the law decree lefs against them, than open enemies and invaders? or if the law be not prefent or too weak, what doth it warrant us to lefs than fingle defence or civil war? and from that time forward the law of civil defenfive war differs nothing from the law of foreign hoftility. Nor is it diftance of place that makes enmity, but enmity that makes diftance. He therefore that keeps peace with me, near or remote, of whatfoever nation, is to me, as far as all civil and human offices, an Englishman and a neighbour: but if an Englishman, forgetting all laws, human, civil and religious, offend against life and liberty, to him offended and to the law in his behalf, though born in the fame womb, he is no better than a Turk, a Saracen, a Heathen. This is gofpel, and this was ever law among equals; how much rather then in force against any king whatever, who in refpect of the people is confeffed inferior and not equal: to distinguish therefore of a tyrant by outlandish, or domeftic, is a weak evafion. To the fecond, that he was an enemy; I anfwer, what tyrant is not? yet Eglon by the Jews had been acknowledged as their fovereign, they had ferved him eighteen years, as long long almost as we our William the conqueror, in all which he could not be fo unwife a statefman, but to have taken of them oaths of fealty and allegiance; by which they made themselves his proper fubjects, as their homage and prefent fent by Ehud teftified. To the third, that he had special warrant to kill Eglon in that manner, it cannot be granted, because not expreffed; it is plain, that he was raifed by God to be a deliverer, and went on juft principles, fuch as were then and ever held allowable to deal fo by a tyrant, that could no otherwife be dealt with. Neither did Samuel, though a prophet, with his own hand abftain from Agag; a foreign enemy, no doubt; but mark the reafon, "As thy fword hath made women childlefs;" a cause that by the fentence of law itself nullifies all relations. And as the law is between brother and brother, father and fon, mafter and fervant, wherefore not between king or rather tyrant and people? And whereas Jehu had special command to flay Jehoram a fucceffive and hereditary tyrant, it feems not the lef imitable for that; for where a thing grounded fo much on natural reason hath the addition of a command from God, what does it but establish the lawfulness of fuch an act? Nor is it likely that God, who had fo many ways of punishing the houfe of Ahab, would have fent a fubject against his prince, if the fact in itself, as done to a tyrant, had been of bad example. And if David refufed to lift his hand against the Lord's anointed, the matter between them was not tyranny, but private enmity, and: David as a private perfon had been his own revenger,› not fo much the people's: but when any tyrant at this day can fhow himself to be the Lord's anointed, the only mentioned reason why David withheld his hand, he may then, but not till then prefume on the fame privilege. We may pass therefore hence to chriftian times. And firft our Saviour himfelf, how much he favoured tyrants, and how much intended they fhould be found or ho noured among Chriftians, declares his mind not obfcure-.* ly; accounting their absolute authority no better than Gentilifm, yea though they flourished it over with the fplendid name of benefactors; charging thofe that would! be his difciples to ufurp no fuch dominion; but that they, they, who were to be of moft authority among them, fhould efteem themselves minifters and fervants to the public. Mat. xx, 25, "The princes of the Gentiles exercife lordship over them; and Mark x, 42, "They that feem to rule," faith he, either flighting or accounting them no lawful rulers; "but ye shall not be fo, but the greatest among you fhall be your fervant." And although he himself were the meekeft, and came on earth to be fo, yet to a tyrant we hear him not vouchsafe an humble word: but "Tell that fox," Luke xiii. 'So far we ought to be from thinking that Chrift and his gospel fhould be made a fanctuary for tyrants from juftice, to whom his law before never gave fuch protection." And wherefore did his mother the virgin Mary give fuch praife to God in her prophetic fong, that he had now by the coming of Chrift, cut down dynaftas, or proud monarchs, from the throne, if the church, when God manifefts his power in them to do fo, fhould rather choose all mifery and vaffalage to ferve them, and let them ftill fit on their potent seats to be adored for doing mifchief? Surely it is not for nothing, that tyrants by a kind of natural inftinct both late and fear none more than the true church and faints of God, as the moft dangerous enemies and fubverters of monarchy, though indeed of tyranny; hath not this been the perpetual cry of courtiers, and court-prelates? whereof no likelier caufe can be alleged, but that they well difcerned the mind and principles of most devout and zealous men, and indeed the very difcipline of church, tending to the diffolution of all tyranny. No marvel then if fince the faitli of Chrift received, in purer or impurer times, to depofe a king and put him to death for tyranny, hath been accounted fo juft and requifite, that neighbour kings have both upheld and taken part with fubjects in the action. And Ludovicus Pius, himself an emperor, and fon of Charles the Great, being made judge (du Haillan is my author) between Milegaft king of the Vultzes and his fubjects who had depofed him, gave his verdict for the fubjects, and for him whom they had chofen in his room. Note here, that the right of electing whom they please is by the impartial teftimony of an emperor in the people : for, for, faid he, "A just prince ought to be preferred before an unjuft, and the end of government before the prerogative." And Conftantinus Leo, another emperor, in the Byzantine laws faith, That the end of a king is for the general good, which he not performing, is but the counterfeit of a king." And to prove, that fome of our own monarchs have acknowledged, that their high office exempted them not from punishment, they had the fword of St. Edward borne before them by an officer, who was called earl of the palace, even at the times of their highest pomp and folemnities; to mind them, faith Matthew Paris, the best of our hiftorians, "that if they erred, the fword had power to reftrain them.". And what reftraint the fword comes to at length, having both edge and point, if any fceptic will doubt, let him feel. It is alfo affirmed from diligent fearch made in our ancient books of law, that the peers and barons of England had a legal right to judge the king: which was the cause moft likely, (for it could be no flight caufe,) that they were called his peers, or equals. This however may stand immovable, fo long as man hath to deal with no better than man; that ifour law judge all men to the lowest by their peers, it should in all equity afcend alfo, and judge the higheft. And fo much I find both in our own and foreign ftory, that dukes, earls, and marquiffes were at first not hereditary, not empty and vain titles, but names of truft and office, and with the office ceafing; as induces me to be of opinion, that every worthy man in parliament, (for the word baron imports no more,) might for the public good be thought a fit peer and judge of the king; without regard had to petty caveats and circumstances, the chief impediment in high affairs, and ever ftood upon moft by circumftantial men. Whence doubtlefs our ancestors who were not ignorant with what rights either nature or ancient conftitution had endowed them; when oaths both at coronation, and renewed in parliament would not ferve, thought it no way illegal, to depofe and put to death their tyrannous kings. Infomuch that the parliament drew up a charge against Richard the Second, and the commons requested to have judgment decreed against him, that the realm might not be endangered. And VOL. II. U Peter V |